Richardson and Richardson

In the matter of *Richardson and Richardson*, heard by Watts J, the proceedings concerned an application for the appointment of a case guardian for the wife. The husband was the opposing party in the dispute.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant leave for an oral application to appoint a case guardian for the wife and, if so, to make such an appointment pursuant to rule 6.10 of the *Family Law Rules 2004*. A further issue was whether to grant leave for the appointed case guardian to seek an adjournment of the proceedings.

Watts J reasoned that the appointment of a case guardian was necessary to ensure the wife's interests were properly represented. The court applied rule 6.10 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* in making the appointment. The court also considered it appropriate to grant the case guardian leave to seek an adjournment to allow for proper preparation.

Consequently, the court ordered that Mr C be granted leave to be appointed as case guardian for the wife and made the appointment. Leave was also granted for the case guardian to apply for an adjournment, and the proceedings were adjourned to 9 April 2010 for further mention. The husband was ordered to pay the costs associated with Mr C's conference with lawyers and their attendance. Directions were also made regarding the provision of anticipated costs, notification of retained lawyers, and a statement of proposed agreed facts and issues.