BURTON & TENANT

In the matter of BURTON & TENANT, Justice Cronin of the Family Court of Australia considered applications for final orders concerning a child, B. The dispute involved the specific orders to be sought at trial by both the applicant and the respondent(s).

The court was required to determine the precise nature of the orders sought by each party and to ensure the proper representation of the child, B. Additionally, the court needed to establish a framework for the efficient conduct of the proceedings, including the filing of amended applications and responses, the appointment and role of a separate representative for the child, and the disclosure of cost information by the parties.

Justice Cronin ordered that all extant applications for final orders be listed for a hearing on 3 November 2011. The parties were directed to file amended applications and responses by specific dates, clearly setting out the orders they intended to seek. Crucially, the court ordered that the child B be separately represented pursuant to section 68L(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975*, requesting Victoria Legal Aid to arrange this representation. The appointed Independent Children’s Lawyer was to file a Notice of Address for Service, receive all relevant documents from the parties within 48 hours of appointment, and advise parties of any firm positions on proposed orders. The court also mandated that represented parties provide a statement of costs incurred and expected to be incurred at the hearing. The court noted that non-compliance with the amended application and response filing orders could lead to an application to proceed on an undefended basis.