Epstein & Epstein

In *Epstein & Epstein*, Judicial Registrar Loughnan considered an application concerning the legal representation of the parties in family law proceedings. The dispute arose from an application by the husband seeking to restrain the wife from instructing a particular firm of solicitors, and a cross-application by the wife seeking to restrain the husband from instructing his chosen firm of solicitors.

The central legal issue before the court was whether there were grounds to restrain either party from continuing to be represented by their respective legal practitioners. This involved an assessment of whether the continued instruction of these firms would prejudice the proper conduct of the proceedings or otherwise be contrary to the interests of justice.

Judicial Registrar Loughnan reasoned that the court possessed an inherent jurisdiction to control its process and prevent abuses. In this instance, the court found that the continued involvement of both firms of solicitors was likely to lead to a breakdown in communication and an escalation of acrimony between the parties, thereby hindering the efficient and just resolution of the proceedings. The decision underscored the court's power to intervene in the choice of legal representation where such representation demonstrably impedes the administration of justice.

Consequently, the court ordered that the husband be restrained from instructing Boyd Olsen Lawyers and the wife be restrained from instructing MacLean & Curtis Solicitors in the proceedings.