PALETTA & QUANEY

In the matter of *Paletta & Quaney*, heard before Judge Burchardt, the applicant sought leave to institute property proceedings out of time. The parties had entered into an informal agreement in 2017 concerning their property. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant had adequately explained the significant delay in commencing formal proceedings and whether they possessed a reasonable prima facie case had proceedings been issued promptly.

The court was required to determine several key legal issues. Firstly, whether the applicant had provided a sufficient explanation for the delay in filing their application for property settlement. Secondly, the court had to assess whether the applicant had a reasonable prima facie case for property adjustment if proceedings had been initiated at an earlier, more timely juncture. Thirdly, the court considered the potential hardship the applicant might face if leave to proceed out of time were not granted. Finally, the court was tasked with balancing these competing considerations, including the likelihood that any amount in dispute, if leave were granted, would be substantially consumed by legal costs.

Judge Burchardt ultimately dismissed the application for leave to proceed out of time. The reasoning focused on the failure to adequately explain the delay and the assessment of the prima facie case. The court weighed the applicant's potential hardship against the significant delay and the practical reality that the costs of litigation would likely outweigh the recoverable amount. Consequently, the application was not granted. The matter was then adjourned for a final hearing on 11 November 2020, with directions given regarding the payment of court fees.