French and Gilbey

This matter came before Cronin J concerning applications made by the parties, French and Gilbey. The precise nature of the dispute is not detailed, but it involves proceedings related to children, as indicated by the reference to an Independent Children’s Lawyer and the preparation of a family report.

The court was required to determine the procedural steps necessary for the final hearing of the applications. This included setting a timetable for the filing and service of documents, specifying the form of evidence to be adduced, and directing the preparation of a family report. The court also needed to consider the rules of evidence applicable to the proceedings and the potential consequences of non-compliance with the established timetable.

Cronin J ordered that all applications be adjourned for a final hearing, scheduled for a specific date in November 2017, and estimated to require three days. The court directed that the evidence in chief of all witnesses be given by affidavit. A detailed timetable was set for the exchange of amended applications, responses, and affidavits, with specific deadlines for each party and the Independent Children’s Lawyer. Furthermore, pursuant to section 62G(2) of the *Family Law Act*, the parties were ordered to attend a family consultant for the preparation of a family report, which was to consider factors under section 60CC of the Act, including parental capacity, responsibility, and the impact of separation on the children. Leave was granted for all parties to issue subpoenas for documents, with the registrar to be satisfied as to relevance upon certification by legal practitioners. A case outline, including disputed issues, affidavits to be read, orders sought, and objections to evidence, was to be filed electronically by a specified date. The court also noted that non-compliance with the timetable could lead to the case being removed from the trial list, and affidavits from previous hearings would not be admissible as evidence in chief without leave.