Poyzer and Tritton (No 2)

In this matter before Dawe J, the parties, Poyzer and Tritton, were engaged in final property proceedings. The dispute concerned applications made by both parties seeking leave to reopen the evidence. The court was required to determine which aspects of the evidence, if any, should be permitted to be re-examined in light of new information or developments.

The court considered the relevance of the proposed evidence to the making of final orders. It applied principles relating to the reopening of evidence in family law proceedings, balancing the need for a just and equitable resolution with the efficient conduct of litigation. The court determined that leave should be granted to reopen evidence on specific, identified issues, provided that certain conditions were met, including the filing of supporting affidavits and the availability of key witnesses for cross-examination.

By consent, the wife was ordered to provide full discovery of documents relating to her employment to the husband. Leave was granted to the husband to reopen evidence concerning the status of superannuation funds, a proposed mortgagee sale of certain properties, and the wife's employment, subject to the provision of specified affidavit evidence and documents. Leave was also granted for the husband to issue subpoenas to the Commonwealth Bank of Australia regarding the mortgagee sale, with reciprocal leave for the wife. The court further ordered that the husband could include particulars of the sale and distribution of proceeds from a specific property in his evidence. The matter was adjourned for the receipt of further evidence on these limited issues.