MANNING & HUTTON

In the matter of *MANNING & HUTTON*, the applicant sought leave to withdraw her applications. These applications included a declaration pursuant to s 90RD of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) that the parties were in a de facto relationship, and leave pursuant to s 44(6) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to proceed with her application after the standard application period had expired. The proceedings were heard by Johns J.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the applicant leave to withdraw her applications. Additionally, the court considered the respondent's application for costs on an indemnity basis, given the late stage at which the applicant sought to withdraw and the fact that the applicant was wholly unsuccessful.

Johns J granted the applicant leave to withdraw her applications. In relation to costs, the court noted that while the applicant was wholly unsuccessful and had sought to withdraw at a late stage, and that the possibility of a costs application had been foreshadowed, there were no exceptional circumstances to justify an order for costs on an indemnity basis. The court found that the circumstances did justify a costs order on a party/party basis, particularly given that neither party was in a strong financial position.

The court ordered that the applicant be granted leave to withdraw her Amended Initiating Application. The court further ordered that the applicant pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the proceedings, to be agreed or taxed on a party/party basis.