JELBART & GANZER (No.2)

This matter concerned an application for a stay of orders in a parenting matter, brought by the Mother against the Father. The dispute arose in the context of an appeal from a discretionary judgment.

The court was required to determine the legal principles applicable to stay applications in parenting proceedings, particularly in light of an appeal from a discretionary judgment. This involved considering the established authorities on appellate interference with discretionary judgments and the specific criteria for granting a stay, including the onus on the applicant, the entitlement to the benefit of a judgment, the presumption of correctness of a judgment, the insufficiency of a mere appeal filing, the bona fides of the applicant, the balance of convenience, the risk of the appeal being rendered nugatory, a preliminary assessment of the appeal's strength, the desirability of stability in a child's living arrangements, the timing of the appeal, and the best interests of the child.

The court applied well-established principles from cases such as *House v The King* and *Gronow v Gronow* regarding appellate intervention in discretionary judgments. It noted that a stay application is discretionary and determined on its merits. The court considered the specific factors outlined in *Aldridge & Keaton (Stay Appeal)* and other relevant authorities, including the onus on the applicant, the presumption of correctness of the judgment, and the need to weigh competing rights and the risk of the appeal becoming nugatory. The court also acknowledged the importance of the child's best interests and the desirability of limiting changes to living arrangements.

The Mother's Application in a Case was dismissed, and costs were reserved.