KING & KING AND ANOR (NO 3)

In the matter of *King & King (No 3)*, Cronin J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife concerning outstanding financial and parenting matters. The dispute arose from the wife's application filed on 6 September 2012, seeking to strike out certain paragraphs of the husband's responses filed on 22 November 2011 and 2 December 2011. The wife also sought leave to proceed on a final undefended basis regarding all outstanding financial matters.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to strike out specific pleadings from the husband's responses, whether to grant the wife leave to proceed on a final undefended basis for financial matters, and how to manage the husband's potential future participation in the final hearing and his ability to seek interim parenting orders. The court also had to consider the husband's non-compliance with interlocutory orders and the evidence presented.

Cronin J reasoned that striking out parts of the husband's responses was appropriate given his failure to comprehensively comply with interlocutory orders. However, the court granted the husband conditional leave to file an application seeking to participate in the final hearing, requiring him to provide proposed final orders, explain his non-compliance, and outline his evidence. The husband was also granted leave to seek interim parenting orders. The court adjourned the final hearing for financial matters and dismissed all other outstanding interim applications, reserving the wife's costs.