SAFFORD & KELSO

In *Safford & Kelso* [2021] FamCA 349, the Family Court of Australia considered applications made by the father, Mr Safford, in proceedings concerning parenting arrangements for the parties' child. The mother, Ms Kelso, alleged significant family violence perpetrated by the father, who had previously been incarcerated for assaults against her. The proceedings had been ongoing for several years, and the father's legal representation had recently ceased.

The court was required to determine two primary issues: whether to grant the father's application for a lengthy adjournment of the final hearing, and whether to make an order under section 102NA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) preventing the father from personally cross-examining the mother, given the history of family violence. The father sought an adjournment of 9 to 12 months, citing financial and emotional incapacity due to caring responsibilities for his unwell partner.

Justice Johns refused the father's adjournment application, noting the extensive delay already in the proceedings, the prejudice to the mother and child from further delay, and the father's history of non-compliance with court orders. The court applied the principles outlined in *Mertens & Mertens* [2016] FamCAFC 136 and Division 12A of the *Family Law Act 1975*, emphasising the need for timely resolution of child-related proceedings and the impact of litigation on children. Regarding the cross-examination issue, the court found that the criteria under section 102NA(1) were met, including the existence of a family violence order and allegations of family violence.

Consequently, the court ordered that the father must not personally cross-examine the mother, and any such cross-examination must be conducted by a legal practitioner. The father was advised of his entitlement to seek legal assistance through the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme, administered by Victoria Legal Aid. The final hearing was to proceed as scheduled.