Bock and Bock (No 2)

In *Bock and Bock (No 2)*, Strickland J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the husband seeking to vary an overseas child maintenance order made in Scotland. The wife did not appear or file any documents in the Australian proceedings. The husband sought to vary the order on the grounds that there had been a sufficient change in circumstances since the order was made, or that material facts had been withheld from the overseas court.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the existing overseas maintenance order could be varied under regulation 36 of the *Family Law Regulations 1984* (Cth), and whether arrears of maintenance should be discharged and enforcement stayed. The court was required to determine if the conditions for variation were met, particularly given that the husband's financial position was not disclosed to the Scottish court when the original order was made.

Strickland J reasoned that the husband had established grounds for variation under regulation 36, finding that either a sufficient change in circumstances had occurred or that material facts had been withheld from the overseas court. The court varied the order, backdating the variation to the date of the original Scottish order. The husband was ordered to pay a significantly reduced amount of child maintenance and the cost of the children's annual return airfares between Scotland and Australia. The order was declared provisional under regulation 38, requiring confirmation by the Scottish court. The Child Support Agency was restrained from enforcing the original Scottish order while the variation remained provisional.