Cadenet and Behrendt (No 2)

In the matter of *Cadenet and Behrendt (No 2)*, Harper J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications by the parties concerning the disclosure and relevance of digital material in family law proceedings. The dispute centred on the identification and preparation of a schedule of images and digital movies to be relied upon by the parties, with specific exclusions and requirements for description.

The court was required to determine the process for identifying relevant digital evidence, particularly images and digital movies, and to establish a framework for their description and submission. A key issue was the exclusion of material derived from a specific "Computer" from this process. The court also needed to address the timing of further hearings and the preparation of documentation for the Independent Children’s Lawyer.

Harper J ordered that outstanding applications be adjourned for further hearing. The parties were directed to confer and prepare a joint schedule identifying images and digital movies asserted as relevant, specifying the basis for each assertion, and excluding material derived from the "Computer". The schedule was to include agreed descriptions or, in the absence of agreement, separate contentions from each party. This schedule was to be submitted to the Independent Children’s Lawyer by a specified date. Furthermore, the court amended a previous order by deleting the word "Annually" from a specific provision, and all questions of costs were reserved for future consideration. The court noted that on the adjourned date, in addition to the issue of material concerning the father's psychology, the court would determine whether the child's time with the father should be expanded or decreased.