ALTIMAS & HOUSE

In the matter of *Altimas & House*, heard before Johnston J, the applicant sought property orders under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), alleging a de facto relationship with the respondent. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the parties had been in a de facto relationship as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis for approximately thirteen years, as claimed by the applicant. The respondent contested this, highlighting periods of living overseas, a relationship with another woman, and limited sexual relations, while the applicant had represented herself as single to Centrelink and the ATO.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether it possessed jurisdiction to determine the property application. This required the Court to ascertain whether the parties met the definition of a de facto relationship under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) on or after 1 March 2009, the relevant date for the Act's application to de facto relationships. The Court had to consider all relevant factors, including the nature of the parties' cohabitation, the financial support provided by the respondent, the extent of their sexual relations, and their representations to government bodies.

Johnston J found that the applicant had failed to establish that she and the respondent were in a de facto relationship on or after 1 March 2009. The Court concluded that, based on the evidence presented, it lacked the necessary jurisdiction to make a property order in the applicant's favour. Consequently, the Court dismissed the applicant's application for property orders.