Freer and Freer & Ors (No 4)

In the matter of *Freer and Freer & Ors (No 4)*, Strickland J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications by the wife and an intervenor. The wife sought orders for litigation funding, claiming an inability to meet her legal costs, and also sought orders pursuant to rule 19.04 of the Family Law Rules. The intervenor sought discovery and leave to issue subpoenas, which had been issued without leave and without established relevance.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the wife's application for litigation funding, the appropriate orders under rule 19.04, and the validity of the subpoenas issued by the intervenor. The husband sought an adjournment of the wife's application for litigation funding to file further material, which the wife did not oppose.

Strickland J granted the adjournment of the wife's application for litigation funding, allowing the husband time to file further affidavits. The court also ordered the husband to provide a written statement of his actual costs incurred to date and the source of those funds, pursuant to rule 19.04. Crucially, the court set aside the subpoenas issued by the intervenor, finding that relevance had not been established and that they had been issued without the court's leave. The documents produced were ordered to be returned. The hearing of the wife's application and the intervenor's application were adjourned to a later date, to be heard by telephone link, with the question of the wife's costs reserved.