Pompidou and Pompidou

In *Pompidou and Pompidou*, Brown J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife to enforce certain orders. The husband had failed to appear at a previous hearing, and the wife sought to proceed with her enforcement application.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant the wife's application to proceed with the enforcement proceedings in the husband's absence and to dispense with further service of documents on him. The court also had to consider the wife's application filed on 12 August 2008, which was otherwise dismissed.

Brown J reasoned that while the husband's absence was problematic, the court retained a discretion to proceed with enforcement applications. The judge applied principles of procedural fairness, balancing the wife's need to enforce orders against the husband's right to natural justice. To address this balance, the court ordered an adjournment of the enforcement application to a specific date, with a clear warning that it would proceed in the husband's absence if he failed to appear. Crucially, the court also made specific provisions for service, requiring the wife to send documents by ordinary prepaid post to the husband's residential address and to his solicitor, with a request for forwarding.

The court ordered that the hearing of the wife's enforcement application be adjourned to 10 September 2008, with the possibility of proceeding in the husband's absence. All requirements for service of the enforcement application on the husband were dispensed with, subject to the wife complying with specific service provisions within seven days. The wife's costs of the applications were reserved, and her application filed on 12 August 2008 was otherwise dismissed. The court also noted that the matter reasonably required the attendance of counsel.