Tritton and Poyzer

In the matter of *Tritton and Poyzer*, Justice Benjamin of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by Ms Tritton to set aside or vary property orders previously made on 3 August 2010. The dispute concerned the finality of these existing property orders.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the existing property orders, made in 2010, should be set aside or varied at Ms Tritton's request. The Court was required to determine if the grounds presented by Ms Tritton were sufficient to justify disturbing the finality of the earlier orders.

Justice Benjamin dismissed Ms Tritton's application to set aside or vary the property orders. The Court also dismissed all other outstanding applications, with the exception of any applications relating to costs. The Court certified that, pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth), it was reasonable for senior counsel and counsel to attend the proceedings. Any applications concerning costs were to be made in accordance with the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth).