Radcliffe and Radcliffe

In *Radcliffe and Radcliffe*, heard before Faulks DCJ, the proceedings concerned a review of an order made by Registrar Routh on 23 November 2006. The specific nature of the dispute between the parties, the father and the wife, is not detailed, but the outcome indicates it involved applications relating to child orders and interim matters.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Registrar's order of 23 November 2006 should be upheld or discharged. The court was also required to determine the procedural steps and conditions precedent to the father filing an amended application seeking final orders, and the consequences of failing to do so. Furthermore, the court needed to establish the process for dealing with any applications concerning changed or new circumstances for child orders, and the finalisation of interim matters.

Faulks DCJ reasoned that the Registrar's order should be discharged. The court then imposed a condition on the father: he was to pay the wife's costs of the proceedings before the Registrar and the current proceedings, assessed at $1,182, by 28 February 2007. Only upon payment of these costs would the father be permitted to file an amended application for final orders by 1 March 2007. Failure to meet this deadline would result in the dismissal of his current application. If the amended application was filed and the mother consented to the orders sought, they could be made by consent. If the mother did not consent, both parties were to file a questionnaire, and a Registrar would appoint a date for the commencement of a trial, with the judge presiding over the first day of trial to determine the priorities for any applications relating to changed or new circumstances for child orders. All other interim matters between the parties were to be finalised.