Speirs and McCarthy

In the matter before Gill J, the dispute involved parties identified as Speirs and McCarthy. The specific nature of the dispute is not detailed in the provided text, but the court's orders indicate it concerned matters requiring consent orders and potentially further directions or hearings.

The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of consent orders between the parties. Gill J was required to consider the terms of these proposed orders, specifically addressing a proposed restriction to "in Canberra" which the judge declined to include. The court also had to consider the procedural steps for any future applications, including filing and response deadlines.

Gill J's reasoning involved approving consent orders as presented, with the exception of the geographical limitation. The judge exercised discretion in declining to restrict the order to "in Canberra," indicating a broader application was intended or agreed. The court then set out a clear timetable for any further applications, emphasizing the need for timely filing and responses, and directed the solicitor for the father to provide a typed electronic copy of the orders to the associate, amending previous directions regarding the form of orders to reflect mutual obligations. The matter was adjourned for further directions or hearing.