中澳婚姻制度的比较法研究
该文章2026年6月20日发布于“土澳海伦-澳洲笔记”微信公共号
您是否认为“未婚、已婚、离婚、丧偶”已经涵盖了所有婚姻状态？事实上，澳大利亚法律认可的关系状态远不止于此。除了传统婚姻状态外，澳大利亚法律还承认事实伴侣关系（De facto）和分居（Separated）这类具有独立法律意义的关系类别。这些制度设计不仅反映了现代社会家庭关系形态的变化，也为观察中国未来家庭法改革的发展方向提供了有趣的比较视角。
Do you think “Never Married,” “Married,” “Divorced,” and “Widowed” are the only marital statuses? Australian law recognises a broader range of legally significant relationship categories, including De facto and Separated. Interestingly, these concepts reflect evolving social realities and may offer a glimpse into the possible future direction of family law reform in China.
01 传统四大婚姻状态（高度对应）
在基础的婚姻状态分类上，中国和澳大利亚存在完全对应的四个概念。无论是日常登记还是法律适用，其定义基本一致：
- 未婚（Never Married）：从未建立过法定婚姻关系。
- 已婚（Married）：依法确立并持续存在的婚姻关系。不过澳洲有结婚冷静期，法定结婚年龄是18岁，特殊情况可以降低。
- 离婚（Divorced）：依法解除婚姻关系后的状态。不过中国有离婚冷静期。
- 丧偶（Widowed）：因配偶去世而导致婚姻关系终止后的状态。
At the most fundamental level, China and Australia recognize four equivalent categories of marital status. Their legal definitions are largely consistent for both administrative registration and legal application:
- Never Married: A person who has never entered into a legally recognized marriage.
- Married: A legally established and subsisting marital relationship.
- Divorced: A marital relationship that has been legally dissolved in accordance with the law.
- Widowed: The marital status of a person whose spouse has passed away, resulting in the termination of the marriage.
02 核心差异概念一：事实婚姻 / 关系（De facto）
这是中澳婚姻法律制度中最大、最显著的差异之一。
澳洲的 De facto（事实婚姻）
1. 独立状态
在澳洲，De facto 是一种被法律完全承认的独立婚姻状态。
2. 广泛包容性
该关系既可以存在于同性伴侣之间，也可以存在于异性伴侣之间。
3. 注册机制
澳洲多数地区（包括新州、维州、昆州、南澳、首都领地及塔州）允许对该关系进行官方注册，并支持其中一方身处境外办理注册手续。
目前，西澳大利亚州（WA）和北领地（NT）尚不能办理该类关系注册。
4. 移民法视角
在澳洲移民法中，De facto 通常被理解并视同于类“已婚状态”，符合条件的伴侣关系可以作为配偶类签证申请的重要依据。
The concept of a De facto relationship represents one of the most significant distinctions between the Chinese and Australian legal systems.
De Facto Relationship in Australia
1. An Independent Legal Status
In Australia, a De facto relationship is a legally recognized and independent relationship status, separate from marriage.
2. Broad Inclusiveness
A De facto relationship may exist between either opposite-sex or same-sex partners.
3. Registration Mechanism
In most Australian jurisdictions, including New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania, a De facto relationship may be officially registered. In some circumstances, registration is possible even when one party is overseas.
Currently, however, Western Australia (WA) and the Northern Territory (NT) do not provide a registration scheme for De facto relationships.
4. Perspective under Australian Migration Law
For Australian migration purposes, a De facto relationship is generally treated in a manner equivalent to a marital relationship. Where the statutory requirements are satisfied, it may serve as the basis for partner visa applications and other migration benefits.
中国的对应现状
1. 无直接对应概念
中国现代法律中，并不存在与澳洲 De facto 完全对应的、独立的法律状态。
2. 司法实践的发展趋势
目前，在处理情侣或订婚双方财产纠纷的司法实践中，中国法院开始逐渐承认同居关系中产生的相关权益，例如共同形成财产的分配问题。
此外，在彩礼案件审理中，最高人民法院对于长期同居但未领取结婚证的情形，也在一定程度上赋予其类似“事实婚姻”的法律评价，从而影响彩礼返还比例的认定。
3. 历史遗留认定
仅针对1994年2月1日之前已经形成事实婚姻的情形（例如当时因农村登记条件有限而未领取结婚证），在特定法律场景下仍可能被认定为“事实婚姻”。
The Position in China
1. No Directly Corresponding Legal Concept
Modern Chinese law does not recognize an independent legal status equivalent to Australia’s De facto relationship.
2. Emerging Judicial Trends
In recent years, Chinese courts have increasingly recognized certain legal rights arising from cohabitation relationships, particularly in disputes involving property accumulated jointly by unmarried couples or engaged partners.
Furthermore, in disputes concerning betrothal gifts (Caili), judicial practice, including guidance from the Supreme People’s Court, has demonstrated a tendency to consider long-term cohabitation without marriage registration as possessing characteristics similar to a factual marital relationship. This may influence the proportion of betrothal gifts that should be refunded.
3. Historical Recognition
Only relationships established before 1 February 1994 may, under limited circumstances, still be recognized as a de facto marriage under Chinese law. This primarily applies to situations where the parties met the substantive requirements for marriage but failed to register due to historical reasons, such as limited registration facilities in rural areas.
03 核心差异概念二：分居（Separated）
对于夫妻感情已经破裂但尚未正式离婚的过渡阶段，中澳两国采取了截然不同的法律定性。
1. 独立的婚姻状态
在澳洲，Separated 是一个法定的独立婚姻状态，介于已婚和离婚之间。
2. 形式多样
分居可以表现为：
- 一方搬离共同住所；
- 双方虽然仍居住在同一屋檐下（Separation under one roof），但已经分房生活，并终止夫妻共同生活。
3. 移民法视角
在澳洲移民法中，分居状态通常被理解并视同于类“单身状态”，意味着双方已不再维持伴侣关系。
For couples whose relationship has broken down but who have not yet formally divorced, China and Australia adopt fundamentally different legal approaches.
Separated in Australia
1. An Independent Marital Status
In Australia, Separated is a legally recognized marital status that exists between being married and being divorced.
2. Flexible Forms of Separation
Separation may take various forms, including:
- One party moving out of the shared residence; or
- Both parties continuing to live under the same roof (“separation under one roof”) while living separate lives and no longer maintaining a marital relationship.
3. Perspective under Australian Migration Law
For migration purposes, a person who is separated is generally regarded as being in a status comparable to being single, as the parties are no longer considered to be in an ongoing partner relationship.
中国的对应现状
1. 无对应独立概念
中国法律并不将“分居”视为一种独立的婚姻状态。在法律身份上，分居夫妻仍然属于已婚。
2. 诉讼离婚中的判断因素
根据《中华人民共和国民法典》，分居仅被理解为诉讼离婚中法院判断夫妻感情是否确已破裂、从而决定是否应当准予离婚的参考因素之一，而非一种独立法律身份。
因此，绝不能将中国法律中的“分居”与澳洲法律中的法定“Separated”状态对等理解。
The Position in China
1. No Equivalent Independent Legal Status
Chinese law does not recognize separation as an independent marital status. Legally, a separated couple remains married until a divorce is formally granted.
2. A Factor in Divorce Proceedings
Under the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China, separation is merely one of the factors that a court may consider when determining whether the marital relationship has irretrievably broken down and whether a divorce should be granted.
Accordingly, the concept of “separation” under Chinese law should not be equated with the legally recognized marital status of “Separated” under Australian law.
关于我
许海伦律师（Hailun XU）毕业于上海交通大学及澳大利亚新南威尔士大学法学院。
现为澳大利亚新南威尔士州高等法院执业律师，同时也是土澳海伦(上海)信息咨询有限公司合伙人，曾在知名互联网及生物医药公司担任法务部负责人。
资质： 新南威尔士州最高法院注册律师（2019）、中国法律职业资格（2014）、英国ACCA会计证书（2013）、中国CATTI翻译证书（2025）
执业范围
• Study Planning & Student Visa 留学规划&学生签证
• Skilled Migration & Family Visa 技术移民&家庭团聚
• Employer Compliance & Sponsorship雇主合规&担保业务
• Administrative Appeals & Ministerial Intervention行政诉讼&部长干预
• Visitor Visa and other Temporary Visas 旅游签证及其他短期签证
• National Innovation Visa and other Permanent Visas 国家创新及其他永居签证
