CREESE & LAPTHORNE

In the matter of *Creese & Lapthorne*, heard by Johnston J, the applicant, Mr Creese, sought an alteration of property interests under s 90SM of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), asserting the existence of a de facto relationship. Conversely, the respondent, Ms Lapthorne, sought a declaration that no such de facto relationship existed between them, which would preclude the application of Part VIIIAB of the Act.

The central legal issue before the court was whether a de facto relationship, as defined by the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), had existed between the parties. This required consideration of the circumstances outlined in s 4AA(2) of the Act, particularly in light of the applicant's claim of substantial contributions despite not meeting the two-year cohabitation threshold. The court also had to determine if, even with substantial contributions, a failure to make a property order would result in a serious injustice to the applicant.

Johnston J reasoned that while the parties had lived together, the threshold of two years of cohabitation, a key factor in establishing a de facto relationship under the Act, was not satisfied. Furthermore, despite the applicant's admitted substantial contributions, the court found that he had failed to establish that a refusal to make a property order would lead to a serious injustice. Consequently, the court declared that a de facto relationship, attracting the application of Part VIIIAB of the Act, had never existed between Mr Creese and Ms Lapthorne.

Accordingly, the court ordered that it be declared that a de facto relationship never existed between Mr Creese and Ms Lapthorne which would attract the application of Part VIIIAB of the Act, and that the Amended Initiating Application filed by Mr Creese be dismissed.