HAYES & EDDINGTON

In *Hayes & Eddington*, Benjamin J of the Family Court of Australia considered objections raised by the legal personal representatives of the estate of the respondent concerning the admissibility of evidence presented by the applicant. The dispute involved the admissibility of an affidavit sworn by the applicant and an affidavit sworn by the applicant's solicitor.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the evidence contained in the applicant's affidavit should be admitted, and whether certain communications contained in the solicitor's affidavit, made in connection with settlement negotiations with the deceased respondent, were admissible. The court was required to determine the application of sections 131 and 135 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) to the evidence in question.

Benjamin J reasoned that the evidence in the applicant's affidavit was excluded pursuant to section 135 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) because its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger that it might be unfairly prejudicial to the respondents. Furthermore, the court refused the applicant leave to rely upon specific paragraphs of the solicitor's affidavit pursuant to section 131 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth), which deals with the exclusion of evidence of settlement negotiations.

Consequently, the court ordered that the applicant be refused leave to rely upon paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of the affidavit of Mr B filed 17 February 2014, and that the evidence contained in the applicant’s affidavit filed 17 February 2014, be excluded.