Oa**Loughlin and Oa**Loughlin

In the matter of *Oa**Loughlin and Oa**Loughlin*, Strickland J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered applications concerning the admissibility of evidence and child support arrangements. The proceedings involved a dispute between a husband and wife regarding their financial obligations, particularly in relation to child maintenance.

The court was required to determine whether to dispense with the formal notice requirements for tendency evidence under section 97(1)(a) of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth). Additionally, the court had to consider an application to strike out specific paragraphs of an affidavit and an application by the wife for leave to amend her Amended Response to seek a departure from the administrative assessment of child support and to establish a fixed sum for capitalized child maintenance.

Strickland J reasoned that dispensing with the formal notice for tendency evidence was appropriate in the circumstances. The court also found grounds to strike out certain paragraphs of the affidavit. Crucially, the court granted the wife leave to amend her response to seek a departure from the administrative child support assessment, proposing an annual rate of $7,800.00, or alternatively, an annual increase in child support payments in accordance with variations in the Consumer Price Index.

The orders made by the court reflected these determinations, including dispensing with the requirement for formal notice of tendency evidence, striking out specified paragraphs of the affidavit, and granting leave to amend the wife's Amended Response to include specific provisions for child support.