CURRIE & WILKINS

This matter came before the Family Court of Australia concerning an application by Ms Currie against Mr Wilkins. The dispute involved family law matters, specifically relating to parenting orders. The hearing was scheduled for 1 March 2018 in Melbourne.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant an adjournment of the proceedings. This arose because the respondent, Mr Wilkins, claimed he had only been made aware of the hearing immediately beforehand, raising questions about natural justice and the court's ability to properly understand the dispute. A further issue was the respondent's failure to clearly articulate the final orders he sought, despite previous applications and responses.

Justice Cronin granted the adjournment, accepting that the respondent's explanation for his lack of prior knowledge of the hearing was plausible. The court reasoned that an adjournment was necessary to ensure it could properly understand the matters in dispute, particularly in light of the respondent's unclear position on final orders and the need to consider the specific provisions of Division 12A of Part VII of the Family Law Act 1975. The judge noted that while the respondent had not had time with the children for months, this did not negate the need for procedural fairness and clarity regarding his desired outcome.

The court ordered that all extant applications be adjourned for mention on 20 April 2018 at 10:00 am, for the purpose of considering the matter's readiness for trial. The question of costs for the mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer was reserved to the return date.