PABST & PABST

In the matter of *Pabst & Pabst*, the husband sought an extension of time to file an application to review orders made on 6 March 2017, or alternatively, sought to set aside those orders pursuant to section 79A(1)(a) or (b) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The wife, in response, applied for summary dismissal of the husband's application under section 45A of the Act. The proceedings were before Judge Burchardt.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the husband's application for review or setting aside of the 2017 orders should be summarily dismissed, and consequently, whether the husband had established grounds for an extension of time or for the setting aside of the orders. The husband contended that he had genuine concerns about whether he had signed all relevant pages of the 2017 orders and alleged fraud and the presentation of false evidence.

Judge Burchardt dismissed the wife's application for summary judgment. The court reasoned that the husband had raised arguable issues regarding the validity of his consent to the 2017 orders, particularly concerning allegations of fraud and false evidence, which warranted a full hearing. The court found that these assertions were not so devoid of merit as to justify summary dismissal.

The court ordered that the application for summary judgment be dismissed and that the costs of that application be reserved. The matter was adjourned for a final hearing, and the husband was ordered to remove all caveats over the parties' properties forthwith.