Melonas and Dietz

In proceedings before Bennett J, the dispute concerned the application of section 102NA(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* to the cross-examination of parties. The court noted that the requirements of this section applied to any cross-examination occurring on or after 11 September 2019.

The central legal issue was how the restrictions imposed by section 102NA(2) would be implemented in the present proceedings. Specifically, the court was required to determine the implications of the provision that neither parent could cross-examine the other personally, and that any such cross-examination could only be conducted by a legal practitioner. The court also needed to address the availability of the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme.

Bennett J reasoned that the parties had been advised of their obligations under section 102NA(2), including the prohibition on self-representation for cross-examination and the requirement for legal practitioner involvement. The court further noted that information regarding the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme had been provided to the parties, and that Victoria Legal Aid, which administers the scheme, would be notified of the court's orders.

The court ordered that the proceedings be adjourned to 7 July 2020, with a provision for administrative adjournment if a family report had not been published. Crucially, the mother was ordered to forthwith make application to Victoria Legal Aid for representation pursuant to section 102NA(2). An earlier order made on 15 January 2020 was also amended by deleting paragraph 12.