Davidson and Davidson (No 2)

In *Davidson and Davidson (No 2)*, Brown J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife for a stay of orders made on the same day.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the wife's application for a stay of the previously made orders should be granted. Additionally, the court was required to determine whether the matter reasonably necessitated the attendance of counsel and solicitors appearing as counsel, pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the *Family Law Rules 2004*.

Brown J dismissed the wife's application for a stay of the orders. The court reasoned that the circumstances did not warrant a stay. Furthermore, the court found that the matter had indeed reasonably required the attendance of counsel and solicitors appearing as counsel, and made orders to that effect.