Paret and Paret and Ors

In *Paret and Paret and Ors*, Judge Heffernan of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered an application for summary dismissal of proceedings. The applicant sought this dismissal, and the respondents sought to have the application dismissed.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's Initiating Application had no reasonable prospect of success, thereby warranting summary dismissal pursuant to section 17A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and rule 13.10 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth). This required the court to assess the pleadings, evidence, and legal arguments presented by the parties to determine if a trial was necessary.

The court's reasoning was guided by the principles established in *Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia*, which emphasised that summary dismissal is available for claims with no reasonable prospect of success, aiming to control costs and delay. The court noted that the onus is on the moving party to demonstrate this lack of reasonable prospect. If a prima facie case is made, the opposing party must identify specific factual or evidentiary disputes to necessitate a trial, rather than merely requiring formal proof. The court also clarified that the word "may" in the relevant legislation confers a power to be exercised when the stipulated conditions are met, not a general discretion. A real issue of fact will generally preclude summary judgment, but a real issue of law can be determined without a trial. All reasonable inferences are to be drawn in favour of the non-moving party.

The court dismissed the applicant's Initiating Application. The first, second, and third respondents were granted liberty to apply with respect to costs within 60 days. All earlier orders in the matter, except for the order that the husband pay the costs of the respondents for their attendance on 27 July 2016, were discharged.