BECKHAM & BECKHAM

In the matter of BECKHAM & BECKHAM, Cronin J presided over proceedings concerning a dispute between the wife, identified as the applicant, and the husband, identified as the respondent. The specific nature of the dispute is not detailed, but the orders indicate it involves matters of child welfare and development, as well as financial or property division, given the reference to applications and a final hearing.

The court was required to determine the procedural framework for the final hearing of the matter. This included establishing the rules of evidence to be applied, setting a timetable for the filing and service of applications, responses, and affidavits of evidence by all parties, including the Independent Children’s Lawyer. Furthermore, the court needed to direct the preparation of a comprehensive family report, including a potential psychiatric evaluation of the parties and children, and to outline the psychiatrist's access to information and advisory role. The court also addressed the issuance of subpoenas for documents and the process for handling objections to evidence.

Cronin J applied provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975*, specifically section 69ZT regarding the application of rules of evidence and section 62G(2) concerning the preparation of family reports. The court ordered that the rules of evidence would apply to the proceedings and directed that evidence in chief be given by affidavit. A detailed timetable was established for the exchange of pleadings and affidavits, with a strict deadline for their filing and service. The court also mandated that the parties attend a family report appointment with a designated professional, who was given specific directions regarding their assessment and reporting obligations. General liberty to apply was granted for specific issues, including contact arrangements for the children and any difficulties arising from the family report process or the timetable.

The applications before the court were adjourned and fixed for a final hearing before Justice Berman, commencing on 19 May 2015, scheduled as a four-day matter. The court also ordered that the reasons for its decision be transcribed and placed on the court file.