KUMARA & GAMAGE

In the matter of *Kumara & Gamage*, heard by Judge Riley, the respondent sought a stay of orders previously made on 6 November 2020. The specific nature of the underlying dispute leading to these orders is not detailed in the provided text, but the application for a stay indicates a challenge to the enforceability or continuation of those existing orders.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the respondent had established sufficient grounds to warrant a stay of the existing orders. This required the court to consider the legal principles governing applications for stays, including the potential prejudice to the parties and the overall interests of justice.

Judge Riley dismissed the respondent's application for a stay. While the reasoning for this dismissal is not elaborated upon in the provided text, the outcome signifies that the court found no compelling legal basis to suspend the operation of the orders made on 6 November 2020. The costs of the application were reserved, meaning a decision on who bears these costs will be made at a later stage. The notations appended to the orders provide important information regarding the application of section 102NA of the *Family Law Act 1975* concerning family violence and cross-examination, as well as the confidentiality provisions of section 121 of the same Act.