Searle & Pencious

In the matter of *Searle & Pencious*, heard before Macmillan J, the dispute concerned an application by the wife for an order prohibiting the husband from instituting further proceedings under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) without leave. The wife sought this prohibition on the grounds that the husband's conduct constituted vexatious litigation.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the husband's past conduct warranted the imposition of a vexatious proceedings order under section 102QB(2)(b) of the Act. This involved assessing whether the husband had, in the court's view, instituted vexatious proceedings.

Macmillan J reasoned that the husband's history of litigation demonstrated a pattern of vexatious conduct, justifying the imposition of a prohibition order. The court applied the principles governing vexatious proceedings orders, focusing on the repetitive and unmeritorious nature of the husband's applications. Consequently, the court ordered that the husband be prohibited from instituting proceedings under the Act without first obtaining leave pursuant to section 102QE. The court also adjourned certain paragraphs of the parties' applications for further hearing and reserved the question of costs associated with the wife's application for a vexatious proceedings order, directing the parties to file written submissions on this issue.