Donalds and Donalds (No. 2)

In the matter of *Donalds and Donalds (No. 2)*, Bennett J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications and procedural matters in proceedings between Mr Donalds (Applicant), Ms Donalds (First Respondent), Ms Gregg (Second Respondent, the maternal grandmother), and the Independent Children's Lawyer. The dispute concerned parenting arrangements for the children, X and Y.

The court was required to determine several issues, including the admissibility of evidence, the conduct of a split final hearing between Melbourne and Newcastle registries, and the application of section 102NA(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* concerning the cross-examination of parties. The court also addressed the preparation of an updated family report and the specific matters it should address, as well as the filing and service of various documents, including case outlines, witness lists, and amended applications.

Bennett J reasoned that the requirements of section 102NA(2) necessitated that neither party could cross-examine the other personally, and such cross-examination could only be conducted by a legal practitioner. To facilitate this, the father was ordered to apply to Victoria Legal Aid for representation under the Cross-Examination Scheme. The court also clarified the mother's reliance on affidavits, specifying that only her affidavit sworn on 13 July 2021 and a forthcoming updating affidavit would be considered, rather than a broader range of previously filed affidavits. The court emphasised the principle of relevance under section 55 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth), distinguishing between mere allegations and evidence that could rationally affect the assessment of a fact in issue.

The court made extensive orders regarding the conduct of the proceedings. These included scheduling the final hearing across August and September 2021 in both Melbourne and Newcastle, directing the preparation of an addendum family report, and setting strict deadlines for the filing and service of all affidavit material and other documents. The court also issued orders restraining the removal of the children from Australia and requested the Australian Federal Police to place the children on the Airport Watch List. Further directions were given for the preparation of an electronic court book, participation in round table conferences, and the provision of information to Victoria Legal Aid. The court also noted that failure to attend or comply with filing requirements could result in the matter proceeding without the defaulting party's input.