MARSHMAN & BARIC

In the matter of *Marshman & Baric*, Forrest J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the Applicant concerning the admissibility of evidence in a Hague Convention hearing. The Applicant sought leave to read and rely upon two affidavits filed the afternoon before the hearing commenced, which were filed outside the time stipulated in the trial directions.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether to grant the Applicant leave to rely on the late-filed affidavits, and whether cross-examination of the parties should be permitted in this Hague Convention matter. The Court noted that the discretion to allow cross-examination in Hague Convention matters is distinct from the usual approach, particularly when both parents are present in Australia, are parties to the proceedings, and the central questions depend significantly on evidence and the credibility of the parties.

Forrest J dismissed the Applicant's oral application to read and rely upon the affidavits of Ms D and Kathleen Simpson. The Court reasoned that the affidavits were filed out of time and their form, relevance, and context were not sufficiently clear. Regarding cross-examination, the Court found it appropriate to allow it in this specific Hague Convention matter, given the presence of both parents as parties and the reliance on evidence and credit for the principal questions.