Currie and Wilkins

The matter of *Currie and Wilkins* came before Cronin J in the Family Court of Australia. The proceedings concerned applications made by the mother and the father, with an Independent Children's Lawyer also involved. The specific nature of the dispute, beyond it being an application for orders, is not detailed in the provided text.

The court was required to determine the procedural steps necessary to advance the case towards a final hearing. This included setting a timetable for the filing and service of amended applications, responses, and affidavits of evidence by all parties, including the Independent Children's Lawyer. The court also had to consider the admissibility of evidence, specifically addressing the use of affidavits from previous hearings and the process for issuing subpoenas for document production.

Cronin J reasoned that a structured timetable was essential for efficient case management and to ensure all parties were prepared for the final hearing. The court directed that evidence in chief would be given by affidavit, streamlining the presentation of evidence. Provisions were made for the issuance of subpoenas, with a requirement for legal practitioners to certify the relevance of documents sought. The court also stipulated that non-compliance with the timetable could lead to the case being relisted for case management, requiring parties to justify its continued presence on the trial list.

The court ordered that a directions hearing proceed in the father's absence. The mother's costs and those of the Independent Children's Lawyer were reserved to the trial. All applications were adjourned and fixed for a final hearing before Cronin J on 11 September 2018, scheduled as a three-day case. A detailed timetable was set for the exchange of pleadings and evidence, with a strict condition that affidavits filed outside this timetable would not be relied upon without leave.