McMillan & McMillan

In *McMillan & McMillan*, heard before Tree J, the wife sought to enforce an order made in 2015, while the husband sought to permanently stay further action on that enforcement warrant.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the wife's application to enforce the 2015 warrant should be permanently stayed. This required the court to consider the principles governing the grant of a permanent stay of enforcement proceedings, particularly in circumstances where there has been a significant delay in seeking enforcement.

Tree J granted the permanent stay, finding that the wife's prolonged inaction in enforcing the warrant had prejudiced the husband. The court applied the principles established in cases concerning the equitable doctrine of laches, which allows for the barring of equitable claims where there has been an unreasonable delay in their assertion, and where that delay has caused prejudice to the respondent. The court determined that the delay in this instance was unreasonable and that the husband had suffered prejudice as a result.

Consequently, the court ordered that further action on the wife’s Enforcement Warrant issued 15 June 2015 be permanently stayed, and that all other extant applications be dismissed, with the matter removed from the list of active pending cases.