Meadows & Meadows (No. 5)

In the matter of *Meadows & Meadows (No. 5)*, Rees J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications filed by both the applicant wife and the respondent husband. The primary dispute revolved around several Applications in a Case that were deemed by the Court to serve no substantive purpose, alongside an application by the wife seeking personal protective orders under section 68B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

The Court was required to determine whether the numerous Applications in a Case filed by both parties should be dismissed due to their lack of substantive purpose. Additionally, the Court needed to consider the wife's application for personal protective orders, which could potentially be determined independently of any overarching substantive application.

Rees J reasoned that the Applications in a Case filed by both the wife and the husband were without substantive purpose and therefore dismissed them. However, the application for personal protective orders under section 68B of the *Family Law Act 1975* was permitted to proceed. The Court set strict timelines for the filing and service of affidavit material by both parties, limiting each to one affidavit from themselves and one from each other witness, unless leave of the Court was obtained. The matter was then listed for a call-over and allocation of a hearing date.