Varnham and Moses (No 2)

In *Varnham and Moses (No 2)*, Cleary J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the husband for a further stay of final orders and an injunction to restrain the wife from enforcing those orders. A Notice of Appeal had been filed against the final orders, and a previous stay had been granted. The husband sought the further stay and injunction in circumstances where the parties' positions had changed since the initial stay.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant a further stay of the final orders and an injunction restraining their enforcement, given the filing of a Notice of Appeal and changes in the parties' circumstances. Specifically, the court had to assess whether the appeal would be rendered nugatory if the stay was not granted, considering that the wife would not be defending the appeal and had sold a property retained as a result of the final orders, while the husband was now employed.

Cleary J reasoned that the appeal would not be rendered nugatory if the stay was not granted. The court noted that the wife had sold a property retained as a result of the final orders, and the husband was now employed. These changes in circumstances, coupled with the wife's intention not to defend the appeal, led the court to conclude that the purpose of a stay, which is to preserve the status quo pending appeal, would not be served by granting a further stay.

Consequently, Cleary J dismissed the husband's application.