Franke and Long and Ors (No 2)

In *Franke and Long & Ors (No 2)*, the Family Court of Australia considered a dispute arising from a subpoena issued by the husband to the wife's solicitors, O'Reilly Stevens Bovey Lawyers. The husband sought financial information, specifically time costing records, relating to the wife's legal representation. The solicitors objected to producing certain documents, asserting they were protected by solicitor-client privilege.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether privilege attached to the time costing records of the wife's solicitors and, consequently, whether the husband should be ordered to pay the solicitors' costs incurred in responding to the subpoena. The court was required to determine the scope of legal professional privilege in relation to such records and to consider the application of section 117 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) regarding costs.

Justice Benjamin found that time recording disclosures could reveal matters covered by legal professional privilege, beyond merely the time spent. While acknowledging the subpoena was too broad, the court allowed inspection of documents that were not subject to privilege. The court also considered an application for costs by Ms. Reaston of O'Reilly Stevens Bovey Lawyers. Applying section 117 of the *Family Law Act*, the court determined that the husband should pay a portion of the solicitors' costs for their efforts in responding to and arguing the subpoena, noting the sensible approach taken by the solicitors in complying with part of the subpoena.

The court ordered that the husband pay the costs of O’Reilly Stevens Bovey Lawyers for the production of documents pursuant to the subpoena and for arguing the subpoena, in the amount of $300.00, to be paid within two months. The court also certified that it was reasonable to engage counsel to attend the hearing concerning the subpoena.