Hoffman and Heffernan

In the Family Court of Australia, Ms Hoffman (the applicant) sought leave to proceed with an application for property adjustment orders against Mr Heffernan (the respondent) concerning their de facto relationship. The core of the dispute revolved around the court's jurisdiction to hear the matter, given that the parties' relationship ended prior to the commencement of the *Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008* (Cth), and the application was made outside the usual time limits.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether it possessed jurisdiction to hear the property adjustment application, particularly in light of the parties' election to "opt in" to the amended legislative regime under section 86A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Secondly, whether to grant the applicant leave to proceed with her application pursuant to section 44(6) of the Act, given that it was filed out of time.

Justice Murphy found that the parties had validly "opted in" to the jurisdiction of the court under section 86A, satisfying all the necessary prerequisites, including the absence of prior State or Territory orders or agreements and the provision of independent legal advice. Consequently, the court held it had jurisdiction to hear the matter. Regarding the application for leave, the court was satisfied that the preconditions under section 44(6) were met, including the potential for hardship if leave were not granted, and importantly, the respondent did not oppose the application.

The court ordered the consolidation of the parties' files and granted the applicant leave to proceed with her application for property adjustment orders. By consent, the court made orders for the transfer of property, refinancing of a mortgage, payment of a sum of money, and transfer of a vehicle, as detailed in minutes of consent signed by the parties. Orders relating to outstanding child support matters were also made by consent, with those proceedings to be finally determined in the Federal Magistrates Court.