BENNETT & BENNETT

In the matter of *Bennett & Bennett*, Johns J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered an application by the husband to review a Judicial Registrar's decision to refuse an adjournment of a case assessment conference. The husband had sought the adjournment on the grounds that the wife had failed to comply with pre-action procedures. The wife contended that she had attempted to comply and, furthermore, that pursuant to rule 1.05(2)(b) of the Family Law Rules, she was not obliged to comply with such procedures due to allegations of family violence.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Judicial Registrar had erred in refusing the adjournment, and consequently, whether the husband's application for review should be granted. A secondary issue concerned the wife's application for costs, specifically whether the husband should be ordered to pay her costs in a fixed sum, given the circumstances of his unsuccessful application.

Johns J reasoned that the wife's assertion regarding the inapplicability of pre-action procedures due to family violence allegations was a relevant consideration. The court found that the wife had made attempts to comply with the procedures, and that the husband's application for adjournment was ultimately misconceived. Consequently, the husband's application for review was dismissed.

In relation to costs, the court considered the husband's complete lack of success and the nature of his application, deeming it to be without merit. Taking into account the financial circumstances of the parties, Johns J ordered that the husband pay the wife's costs fixed in the sum of $1,760. The court also made orders regarding the exchange of lists of chattels removed from a property.