Application for interim spousal maintenance — whether applicant in a de facto relationship. The applicant sought an interim spousal maintenance order against the respondent in the sum of $5,592 per month. The parties had been in a relationship for over 30 years and separated in 2015. The respondent's position was that the applicant had been able to meet her own needs for two years without maintenance, and that the applicant was in a de facto relationship with her partner. The court noted it's ability to grant interim maintenance to a party and considered the applicant's reasonable needs, her ability to meet them, the respondent's ability to meet those needs, and whether the court should exercise it's discretion in granting interim maintenance. The court excluded some of the costs claimed by the applicant, and noted that she was working to the best of her abilities. In finding that the applicant was not in a de facto relationship, the court noted that the applicant and her partner did not share a common residence, the applicant met her own costs or reimbursed her partner in the event that he met her costs, the lack of shared bank accounts, the lack of a commitment to a shared life. The court found that against the backdrop of the duration of the relationship between the parties, the lifestyle that the parties had lived during their relationship, and short term nature of the application, the court found that it was just in the circumstances that the respondent meet the needs of the applicant in the sum of $2,462.80 per month for a maximum period of six months. Judgment Date: 22 March 2017 * * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *