Stopford Malloy & Malloy (No. 3)

In the matter of *Stopford Malloy & Malloy (No. 3)*, Harper J of the Family Court of Australia considered whether section 102NA(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) had mandatory application in proceedings where allegations of family violence had been made between the wife and the husband. The parties intended to cross-examine each other, despite parenting issues having been finalised by agreement. The wife argued that personal protection injunctions, established by consent orders in October 2017, brought section 102NA(2) into mandatory operation, thereby preventing the husband, a self-represented litigant, from personally cross-examining her.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the existing injunctions, which included restraints against denigration, intimidation, surveillance, and specific communication methods, constituted "an injunction under section 68B or 114 for the personal protection of either party... against the other party" as contemplated by section 102NA(1)(c)(iii) of the Act. This determination was crucial to ascertain if the mandatory prohibition on self-representation during cross-examination under section 102NA(2) applied to the proceedings.

Harper J reasoned that the restraints imposed by the 2017 consent orders were indeed properly characterised as injunctions for the personal protection of each party against the other, thereby satisfying the precondition in section 102NA(1)(c)(iii). The court noted that the wife's allegations of coercive and controlling behaviour, if proven, would fall within the definition of family violence. Consequently, the court concluded that section 102NA(2) had mandatory application in these proceedings.

The court ordered that the requirements of section 102NA(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) were to apply to any cross-examination of the applicant wife and respondent husband. This meant that neither party could cross-examine the other personally, and any cross-examination of either party could only be conducted by a legal practitioner acting on their behalf. The parties were advised of this requirement and the availability of the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme.