Stopford Malloy & Malloy (No 3)

In *Stopford Malloy & Malloy (No 3)*, Austin J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications concerning disclosure and costs. The wife alleged that the husband's discovery, provided pursuant to consent orders, was incomplete. This led to the wife seeking further discovery and leave to issue a subpoena.

The court was required to determine whether the husband had complied with his discovery obligations and whether further discovery was warranted. Additionally, the court had to consider the wife's application for costs, particularly in light of the husband's alleged non-compliance and his assertion of financial hardship.

Austin J applied rules 13.04 and 13.07 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth) concerning discovery. The court found that the husband's discovery was indeed incomplete and ordered him to produce specific documents within 28 days, or file an affidavit detailing their non-existence, cessation, or disposal, including steps taken to ascertain their whereabouts and current location. Leave was granted to the wife to issue a subpoena to DD Pty Ltd for specified documents. Regarding costs, the court noted the husband's opposition to the wife's application, despite his claims of financial inability, and his expenditure on counsel and affidavits. Counsel for the husband conceded he could not resist a costs order.

Consequently, the husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs on a party/party basis for the applications related to the wife's application filed on 20 July 2016 and the husband's response filed on 25 August 2016. The court also made orders regarding the preparation of a single expert witness report and adjourned final parenting orders.