Stokes and Stokes & Anor

In the matter of *Stokes and Stokes & Anor*, Johns J of the Family Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning property and parenting matters. The wife had filed an amended application seeking to include parenting issues, proposing that these be heard separately from the property matters which were already listed for a three-day final hearing. The husband, however, sought that both property and parenting issues be determined concurrently.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to bifurcate the proceedings, hearing property and parenting matters separately, or to consolidate them into a single hearing. The court was required to weigh the potential benefits of efficiency and cost savings against the practicalities of the court's capacity and the parties' procedural requests.

Johns J reasoned that ventilating all issues in one hearing would ultimately save the parties time and costs. However, the court noted its inability to accommodate an additional three days to the existing hearing to address both property and parenting matters. Consequently, the court ordered that the previously scheduled final hearing be vacated. The matter was then relisted for a six-day final hearing before Johns J on 19 July 2021, encompassing both property and parenting issues, with directions for the filing of evidence by affidavit and other procedural steps to ensure readiness for the consolidated hearing.