Holt and Edmondson

In the matter of *Holt and Edmondson*, heard before Judge Obradovic, the dispute concerned an application by the Respondent to restrict the cross-examination of the husband. Specifically, the Respondent sought to prevent questions relating to a potential *Kennon* argument from being put to the husband during cross-examination.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant the Respondent's application to limit the scope of cross-examination. This required the court to consider the admissibility and relevance of questions pertaining to a *Kennon* argument in the context of the proceedings.

Judge Obradovic dismissed the Respondent's application. The court's reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, implicitly determined that questions relevant to a *Kennon* argument were permissible within the bounds of cross-examination in this instance. The court applied principles governing the scope and relevance of cross-examination in family law proceedings.

The outcome of the application was that the Respondent's oral application made on 23 August 2016 to restrict the cross-examination of the husband was dismissed.