Strahan and Strahan

The Family Court of Australia heard an application by the wife, Ms Strahan, seeking orders that the husband, Mr Strahan, execute letters of authority to the Australian Taxation Office and the Hong Kong Internal Revenue Department. These letters would permit the respective agencies to release specified documentation to the wife. The husband sought the dismissal of the wife's application.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the wife had established sufficient relevance to justify compelling the husband to execute the broad letters of authority. This involved determining the appropriate test for relevance in the context of disclosure obligations under the Family Law Rules 2005 (Cth), specifically concerning the production of documents from third-party agencies. The court was required to consider the husband's duty of full and frank disclosure and the wife's onus to demonstrate the relevance of the documents sought.

The court applied the "apparent relevance" test, as established in *Hatton v Attorney-General of Australia*, to assess the wife's application. This test requires the party seeking production to demonstrate that the material sought has an apparent connection to the issues in the proceedings, to be established by reference to the affidavit material. The court found that the wife's draft letters of authority were drafted extremely broadly, potentially leading to the production of documentation with no clear relevance to the financial proceedings. Consequently, the wife had not discharged her onus to establish the apparent relevance of the extensive documentation sought.

Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the wife's Application in a Case were dismissed. The question of costs was reserved.