Andrews & Andrews

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia considered an appeal by the appellant, Mr Andrews, against a decision of a trial judge who had refused his application for leave to bring an application for spousal maintenance out of time. The dispute centred on whether the trial judge had erred in finding that Mr Andrews had failed to adduce evidence satisfying the requirements of section 44(4)(b) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and in the exercise of discretion in refusing leave on hardship grounds.

The legal issues before the Full Court were whether the trial judge had erred in determining that Mr Andrews had not placed admissible evidence before the court or conducted his case on the basis that he satisfied the requirements of section 44(4)(b), and whether the trial judge had erred in the exercise of discretion in refusing leave on hardship grounds, particularly in light of the appellant's conduct and the delay in bringing the application.

The Full Court found no error on the part of the trial judge. The judge correctly focused on the question of hardship under section 44(4)(a) and carefully analysed the evidence relevant to this issue and the matters relevant to the exercise of discretion. The trial judge was also correct to take into account the history of Mr Andrews' conduct in the related section 79 proceedings and his failure to give an acceptable reason for the long delay in bringing the spousal maintenance application. These were all relevant matters in the exercise of discretion.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. As the appellant was wholly unsuccessful, the Full Court ordered that he pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.