Seaton and Seaton (No. 2)

In the matter of *Seaton and Seaton (No. 2)*, Benjamin J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications made by the wife in ongoing proceedings. The dispute concerned the wife's request to issue a subpoena directly to Mr B Seaton, requiring his attendance to give evidence, and related procedural matters.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to grant leave for the wife to issue a subpoena directly to Mr B Seaton, and how to manage the evidence and appearances of parties and witnesses in light of the impending hearing. The court also had to consider applications that Mr B Seaton might intend to make regarding certificates under the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) and the form of his evidence.

Benjamin J granted leave for the wife to issue a subpoena directly to Mr B Seaton, requiring his attendance on 6 December 2018. The court also permitted the husband's solicitor to attend the hearing by video-link. Directions were made for Mr B Seaton to file and serve any affidavit he intended to rely upon in support of applications for a certificate under s 128 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) or for his evidence in chief to be given by affidavit. Costs were reserved. The court further varied a previous order, requiring the husband to file and serve a Response to the applicant’s Notice of Facts, Issues and Contentions within a specified timeframe, contingent on the filing and service of Mr B Seaton's affidavit.