SAIF & SAIF (NO.2)

The case of *SAIF & SAIF (NO.2)* concerned an application by the applicant, SAIF, for an order that the respondent, SAIF, be restrained from commencing or continuing proceedings in the Family Court of Australia. The dispute arose from allegations of family violence and the applicant's subsequent application for protection orders. The matter was heard by Hartnett J in the Supreme Court of South Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant had established a sufficient basis to grant an interlocutory injunction restraining the respondent from pursuing proceedings in the Family Court. This involved considering the principles governing the grant of such injunctions, particularly in circumstances where parallel proceedings are being conducted in different jurisdictions, and the potential for vexation or oppression.

Hartnett J applied the principles established in cases such as *Australian Coal and Shale Industry Superannuation Pty Ltd v Thales Australia Ltd* and *O'Neill v Phillips*. His Honour considered the balance of convenience, the likelihood of the applicant succeeding in their claim for an injunction, and whether the Family Court proceedings were being conducted in a manner that was vexatious or an abuse of process. The Court found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the Family Court proceedings were vexatious or oppressive, nor that there was a strong likelihood of success in the application for an injunction.

Consequently, the application for an interlocutory injunction was dismissed.