Stennard & Stennard

In the matter of *Stennard & Stennard*, Gill J considered an application by the father for leave to file a further affidavit and to provide certain subpoenaed material to a single expert. The dispute arose in family law proceedings concerning child-related matters.

The court was required to determine whether the father should be granted leave to file a substantial further affidavit, which was not provided for under the Family Law Rules, and whether to permit the provision of extensive subpoenaed material to the single expert. The interaction between the principles governing the admission of affidavits in reply and the overarching purpose of resolving child-related proceedings justly and in a timely manner was central to the court's consideration.

Gill J noted that the Family Law Rules do not generally permit the filing of further affidavits without leave, with specific provisions for responses and replies. Citing *Czeb & Czeb*, the court acknowledged the purpose of these rules is to prevent undue prolixity and the overcomplication of issues. However, in this instance, the court accepted that the father should be permitted to file affidavit material strictly in reply to matters raised by the mother, requiring leave and ensuring the material did not effectively split his case. Regarding the subpoenaed material, the court found that while the objects of the subpoenas were relevant, their precise importance to the expert's task and the proceedings required closer analysis, suggesting an agreed approach between the parties would be ideal.

The court ordered that the father be at liberty to rely upon and provide to the expert so much of his further affidavit as was strictly in reply, with the balance to be struck out. The court also ordered that the expert may be provided with such subpoenaed documents as are agreed by the parties, discharging a prior order.