ARKIN & BLASBERG

In the matter of ARKIN & BLASBERG, the applicant and respondent were involved in family law proceedings. The primary dispute concerned an application to vacate a trial date previously fixed for 30 July 2019. The respondent sought this adjournment due to suffering from malignant cancer, asserting his case was not ready for trial on the scheduled date. This followed a previous vacation of an earlier trial date. The court was also required to consider an application for a mandatory injunction and issues relating to superannuation, specifically the respondent's request to compel the creation of fresh binding death benefit nominations.

The legal issues before the court included the fairness of proceeding with the trial given the respondent's medical condition and his assertion of unreadiness, balanced against the applicant's interest in the respondent being held to the existing trial date. The court also had to determine the principles applicable to mandatory injunctions under section 114 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and consider aspects of Part VIIIB of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) concerning superannuation and binding death benefit nominations.

Wilson J considered the competing interests of the parties. In relation to the trial date, the court acknowledged the respondent's serious illness and the potential unfairness of proceeding without adequate preparation. Balancing this against the applicant's right to have the matter resolved, the court ultimately vacated the trial date. Regarding the superannuation, consent orders were reached by the parties, addressing the respondent's application to have the proceeds of his superannuation dealt with under his will rather than disbursed to nominated beneficiaries. The court ordered that agreed minutes giving effect to these reasons for judgment were to be brought in by 4pm on 25 July 2019.