Sitwell and Sitwell

In *Sitwell & Sitwell*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application for an adjournment by the husband, who appeared unrepresented. The wife, represented by counsel, opposed any further adjournment. The husband claimed ill health, specifically a migraine, as the reason for his inability to proceed with the hearing.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant the husband's application for an adjournment, given the history of previous adjournments and the wife's strong opposition. The court also had to determine the appropriate orders regarding costs and the future conduct of the proceedings, particularly in light of the husband's alleged inability to secure legal representation and his claims regarding the conduct of his potential legal team.

Collier J granted the adjournment, acknowledging the husband's stated ill health for the day, despite the lack of medical evidence. However, the court expressed significant reservations about granting further adjournments, referencing *Angellini & Angellini* for the principle that indefinite adjournments can lead to an unforeseeable end to proceedings. The court also noted the husband's history of seeking adjournments due to ill health, as indicated by the benchsheets. While granting the adjournment, the court imposed strict conditions for the next hearing and made substantial costs orders against the husband, secured by a charge over a property to be transferred into his name, to ensure the wife's recourse. The court also referenced *Tate & Tate* in the context of parties running out of time to comply with orders.

The matter was adjourned to 14 March 2013, with strict orders that it would proceed on that date regardless of further circumstances or adjournment requests from the husband. The husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs of the day on an indemnity basis, certified for counsel at the highest rate, and these costs, along with previous costs awarded to the wife, were to be secured by a charge over the husband's future property title, with a provisional amount of $15,000 included in that charge. The husband was also ordered to serve any material he intended to rely upon by a specific date.