Clelland & Clelland

The parties, Mr Clelland and Ms Clelland, were divorced but subsequently resumed cohabitation in a de facto relationship. Ms Clelland sought orders for property division and interim spousal maintenance. The primary question before the court was whether it possessed jurisdiction to hear the property proceedings, given the parties' divorce and subsequent de facto relationship.

The court was required to determine whether the property division sought by Ms Clelland constituted a "matrimonial cause" within the meaning of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly in light of the parties' resumed cohabitation in a de facto relationship after their divorce. Additionally, the court had to consider Ms Clelland's application for leave to apply for interim spousal maintenance out of time, pursuant to section 44(3) of the *Family Law Act*.

His Honour, Faulks DCJ, found that the case was bound by the decision in *Kowalski & Kowalski* [2013] FamCAFC 155, which held that a property settlement following a divorce, where the parties had resumed cohabitation in a de facto relationship, could still fall within the definition of a matrimonial cause. His Honour determined that the present circumstances were not distinguishable from *Kowalski* and therefore the court had jurisdiction to hear the property proceedings. Regarding the interim spousal maintenance, leave to apply out of time was granted, and interim spousal maintenance was ordered.

The parties were directed to make further submissions concerning the granting of leave to apply for property division out of time.