PALGROVE & PALGROVE

In *Palgrove & Palgrove*, heard by Judge Harman, the parties sought to discharge a referral to arbitration in family law proceedings. The application was prompted by allegations of significant family violence and concerns regarding the parties being physically present at the same location. The central question was whether the parties could withdraw their consent to the arbitration referral and return the matter to court, or if the dispute remained arbitrable, particularly where public interest considerations might render it non-arbitrable.

The court considered whether the dispute was arbitrable, noting that public interest could, in some circumstances, render a dispute non-arbitrable. However, the primary focus of the application was on the practicalities of proceeding with the arbitration given the allegations of family violence. The court determined that the dispute was capable of being arbitrated, and the issue then became how to facilitate the arbitration in a manner that addressed the parties' safety concerns.

To resolve the practical difficulties, Judge Harman directed that the arbitration proceed with one or both parties attending by video, and that the parties not be required to be present in the same physical location. The court noted that it was for the Arbitrator to determine the specific arrangements for attendance, such as whether one party and their counsel would be physically present with the Arbitrator while the other attended remotely, or if both parties would attend remotely. The parties were ordered to do all things necessary to ensure the arbitration could be rescheduled and proceed as soon as practicable, and the Application in a Case was removed from the list of cases awaiting hearing.