Denning and Denning (No. 3)

In the matter of *Denning and Denning (No. 3)*, heard before Young J, the dispute concerned interim proceedings in a family law application filed on 1 September 2008. The specific nature of the underlying application and the precise relationship between the parties (beyond their designation as "husband" and "wife") are not detailed in the provided text.

The court was required to determine the procedural steps and orders necessary to advance the interim hearing of the application. This included setting a date for the further hearing, establishing a timeline for the wife to file and serve any response or supporting affidavits, and dictating the method of service for court documents. The court also considered the certification of the matter as reasonably requiring the attendance of counsel.

Young J ordered that the further hearing be adjourned to the Judicial Duty List on 15 October 2008. The wife was directed to file and serve any response or affidavit by 8 October 2008. Service of the order, extempore reasons for judgment, and supporting documents was to be effected by the husband via prepaid registered post to two specified residential addresses and additionally by the husband's solicitors to the firm of Scomparin & Bernardi. The extempore reasons were to be transcribed and made available to the parties. Costs of the interim hearing and the application were reserved, and it was certified that the matter reasonably required the attendance of counsel for the husband.