Halkias & Pace (No 2)

In *Halkias & Pace (No 2)*, heard before Beckhouse J in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, the applicant, Mr Halkias, sought a stay of orders made on 14 May 2021, pending the determination of an appeal against those earlier orders. The respondent was Ms Pace.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant a stay of the previous orders. This involved considering the principles governing the grant of interlocutory injunctions, specifically the balance of convenience and the likelihood of success on appeal, in the context of family law proceedings. The court also had regard to the provisions of section 121 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), which prohibits the publication of identifying details of family law proceedings.

Beckhouse J reasoned that a stay was appropriate in this instance. The court applied the principles for granting a stay, which typically involve assessing whether the applicant has an arguable case on appeal and whether the balance of convenience favours granting the stay. The court considered that the potential for irreparable harm to the parties if the previous orders were not stayed, coupled with the existence of an arguable ground of appeal, weighed in favour of granting the relief sought. The court also noted the importance of upholding the confidentiality provisions of section 121 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

The court ordered that the orders made on 14 May 2021 be stayed until the determination of the appeal against those orders. Costs were reserved.