Garrett and Dickinson

In the matter of *Garrett and Dickinson*, heard by Judge Bender, the applicant sought leave to file an application for the alteration of property interests out of time, pursuant to section 44(6) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The respondent opposed this application.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of section 44(6) of the *Family Law Act 1975* to be granted leave to institute proceedings for the alteration of property interests after the prescribed time limit had expired. This involved assessing whether the applicant had demonstrated sufficient cause for the delay and whether it would be just and equitable to grant such leave.

Judge Bender dismissed the applicant's application. While the specific reasons for the dismissal are not detailed in the provided text, the outcome indicates that the court was not satisfied that the applicant had met the threshold for granting leave under section 44(6) of the *Family Law Act 1975*. The court's decision meant that the applicant was unable to proceed with their application to alter the property interests out of time.