LOU & WONG

In the Family Court of Australia, Mr Lou (applicant) and Ms Wong (respondent) were involved in parenting proceedings concerning their two children. The primary dispute centred on the father's requested increase in time with the children, from six to seven nights per fortnight, which the mother opposed, seeking a reduction to four nights per fortnight. The proceedings were brought to the court's attention due to the recent finalisation of a family violence intervention order against the father in favour of the mother and children.

The central legal issue before the court was the application of section 102NA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), which mandates protections against self-representation in cross-examination in certain circumstances. Specifically, the court was required to determine whether the existence of a final family violence intervention order satisfied the criteria under section 102NA(1)(c)(ii) of the Act, thereby triggering the mandatory protections outlined in section 102NA(2). These protections prohibit parties from personally cross-examining each other and require any such cross-examination to be conducted by a legal practitioner.

Justice Johns found that the final family violence intervention order, made by consent in the Magistrates' Court, satisfied the requirements of section 102NA(1)(c)(ii). Consequently, the mandatory protections under section 102NA(2) were engaged. The court reasoned that given the parties' stated intention to cross-examine each other and the presence of the intervention order, it was necessary to make orders preventing personal cross-examination. The parties were advised of their right to apply to the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme for legal representation to conduct any necessary cross-examination.

In light of the need for parties to potentially engage legal practitioners through the Commonwealth scheme, Justice Johns vacated the final hearing previously scheduled to commence on 31 May 2021. All extant applications were adjourned for mention before the court on 16 June 2021. The court also ordered that a copy of its orders be provided to Victoria Legal Aid, which administers the scheme, to assist the parties in their applications.