ELMI & MUNRO

The Family Court of Australia considered an application by a father seeking to alter parenting orders made in 2012 following a five-day trial. The father's application followed significant intervening litigation.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the father had demonstrated materially changed circumstances justifying a variation of the existing orders, and the application of the doctrines of *res judicata* and issue estoppel, including consideration of the principles discussed in *Rice v Asplund*.

His Honour Judge Wilson dismissed the father's application, finding no evidence that the proposed new orders were necessitated by materially changed circumstances. The Court reviewed authorities concerning the finality of litigation and the circumstances in which *res judicata* and issue estoppel arise, noting that these principles are not displaced by the so-called "rule in Rice and Asplund". The Court concluded that the existing orders should stand.