CHLOROS & CHLOROS

In *Chloros & Chloros* [2021] FamCA 650, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the husband for leave to issue a subpoena to the wife. The subpoena sought the production of ten categories of documents, primarily relating to the medical care and well-being of the parties' daughter, X, and other children of the marriage, with one item concerning a financial transaction. The proceedings before the Court were solely related to property adjustment under section 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the documents sought by the husband's proposed subpoena were relevant to the property proceedings. A secondary issue concerned the wife's application for costs against the husband, given his unsuccessful application. The Court was required to determine if the husband's conduct and the nature of his application justified an order for costs against him, departing from the general rule that parties bear their own costs.

Johns J dismissed the husband's application to issue the subpoena, finding that the documents sought, with the exception of one item concerning a financial transaction, were not relevant to the property proceedings. The husband conceded that the majority of the requested documents related to parenting matters, which were not live issues before the Court. The Court accepted the wife's submission that the subpoena constituted a "fishing expedition" and that the financial document sought had already been produced. Regarding costs, the Court found that the husband had been wholly unsuccessful and that his conduct, including the repeated appearances before the Court and the pursuit of irrelevant documents, justified an order for costs. The Court ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs fixed at $1510.