WARNER & WARNER

In *Warner & Warner*, the applicant wife sought an adjournment of proceedings due to incomplete investigations concerning tax issues, which was opposed by the respondent husband. The court, presided over by Cronin J, was required to determine whether to grant the adjournment, considering the prejudice to each party and the broader implications for the administration of justice. Additionally, the court had to consider the husband's application for costs beyond the usual scale for the adjourned hearing and the wife's request for a stay of any costs awarded pending the final determination of the matter.

The court reasoned that while the wife's delay in investigating the tax issues was puzzling, particularly given her prior involvement with the trust and the disclosure of relevant documents by March 2017, the potential for significant financial consequences to her warranted granting the adjournment. The court applied the principles outlined in *Aon Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University*, which emphasise that in considering an adjournment at the trial stage, the court must balance the interests of the parties with the efficient use of judicial resources and public confidence in the legal system. Despite the lateness of the application, the court found that the greater prejudice would lie with the wife if the adjournment were refused, given the remote possibility of substantial financial repercussions.

Regarding costs, the court ordered that the wife pay the husband's costs thrown away for the hearing on 29 May 2017, fixed at $26,000.00. This order was made beyond the usual scale but not on an indemnity basis, reflecting the circumstances of the adjournment. The wife's application for a stay of payment of these costs pending the final hearing was refused, as the court found that the circumstances did not justify such a stay.