Driscoll and Driscoll

In *Driscoll and Driscoll*, heard by Judge Wilson, the initiating application filed on 2 July 2015 was dismissed, with the court ordering that the consent orders made on 2 February 2015 remain in full force and effect.

The central legal issue before the court was the enforceability and continued operation of the consent orders previously made by the parties, in light of the subsequent initiating application.

The court's decision to dismiss the initiating application and uphold the existing consent orders indicates that the grounds upon which the new application was brought were not sufficient to warrant setting aside or varying the prior agreement of the parties. The principle applied is that consent orders, representing a binding agreement between parties, are generally upheld unless there are compelling reasons to do otherwise, such as fraud, duress, or a significant material change in circumstances that was not contemplated by the parties at the time of the original agreement. In this instance, the court found no such compelling reasons to disturb the existing orders.