HOLMES & HOLMES (No.2)

In the Family Court of Australia, Judge Scarlett considered an Application in a Case filed by one party seeking an undertaking not to relocate the residence of the children. The respondent party sought to dismiss this application.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to warrant the court granting an undertaking regarding the relocation of the children. A secondary issue arose concerning the admissibility of a letter marked "Without prejudice save as to Costs," which the respondent sought to rely upon.

Judge Scarlett found that the evidence presented by the applicant was insufficient to justify the making of an undertaking concerning the children's residence. Consequently, the application was deemed unnecessary. Furthermore, the court determined that the "Calderbank" letter was inadmissible in the proceedings, as the proceedings were not related to costs.

The court ordered that the Application in a Case filed on 5 May 2015 be dismissed, and that each party bear their own costs.