BANNISTER & PERGOLESI

In *Bannister & Pergolesi*, the parties sought an adjournment of outstanding applications for final and interim relief before Cronin J in the Family Court of Australia. The specific nature of the dispute between the parties is not detailed in the provided text, beyond the fact that it involved applications for relief.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant the requested adjournment of the proceedings. This involved considering the reasonableness of engaging counsel, including senior counsel, for the hearing, as evidenced by the certification pursuant to Order 19.50 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth). The court was also required to determine how and when reasons for the adjournment should be made available.

Cronin J reasoned that an adjournment was appropriate in the circumstances, leading to orders that all outstanding applications for final and interim relief be adjourned to a date to be fixed. The court further ordered that the case management judge provide a timetable for the filing of material by each party prior to the designated interim hearing date. Costs were reserved for both parties. The court also certified that it was reasonable to engage counsel, including senior counsel, and that reasons for the adjournment should be made available as soon as practicable. The judgment was published under the pseudonym *Bannister & Pergolesi* pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).