Cuddy & Miller

In the matter of *Cuddy & Miller*, Strickland J of the Family Court of Australia was required to consider an application by the mother and the Independent Children's Lawyer (ICL) to dismiss the father's application for final orders concerning the time a child should spend with him. The father's counsel indicated they did not know their client's whereabouts, despite the father having been on notice of the hearing for some time.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to dismiss the father's application for final orders, given his non-appearance and the lack of communication from him. This required the court to consider the implications of the father's absence on the progression of the proceedings and the best interests of the child.

Strickland J reasoned that the father's prolonged absence and failure to engage with the proceedings, despite being notified, demonstrated a lack of commitment to pursuing his application. The court considered that continuing the proceedings without the father's participation would be unproductive and potentially detrimental to the child. Consequently, the court dismissed the father's application for final orders and his amended application, ordering them to be removed from the active pending cases list. The court also adjourned the question of the mother's costs, discharged the order appointing the ICL, and set aside a subpoena issued to Dr S.