Medlow & Medlow (No 2)

In the Family Court of Australia, Medlow & Medlow (No 2) dealt with an appeal concerning the amendment of orders under the slip rule in r 17.02 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth). The appellant sought to have orders amended, specifically requesting a payment from a joint bank account. The central issue was whether the Full Court had inadvertently omitted to make such an order and if the slip rule applied to the order sought. Additionally, the court had to determine if the order sought constituted an interim property settlement and whether the Full Court intended to make an order for payment.

The court examined the nature of the order sought and concluded that it was not an order for interim property settlement. The Full Court did not intend to make an order for payment from the joint bank account. Therefore, the slip rule did not apply to the order sought. Given these findings, the application for amendment under the slip rule was dismissed. The court found no basis to conclude that the Full Court had inadvertently omitted to make the order sought.

The court ruled that the Application in an Appeal filed on 23 March 2016 was dismissed. The Full Court did not intend to make the order sought, and thus, the application for amendment was not valid. Consequently, the court made no order as to costs, as the unsuccessful Application in an Appeal did not warrant any costs being awarded to the respondent.