Wellington & Child Support Registrar

In the matter of Wellington & Child Support Registrar, the respondent sought an extension of time to file and serve a summary of argument. The appellant, Wellington, objected to the extension, arguing that his consent was not obtained, and that the extension itself was inappropriate. The case was heard by the Family Court of Australia, which granted the extension. The appellant subsequently filed an appeal to the Full Family Court of Australia against the Registrar's decision. The Full Court found that the extension should have been granted, as there was no undue prejudice to the appellant, and the appeal had not yet been listed for hearing. The Full Court dismissed the appeal and made no order as to costs.

The legal issues that the Full Court was required to decide included whether the extension of time was appropriate, and whether the appellant had been prejudiced by the extension. The Full Court considered the procedural orders made by the Registrar, and the emails exchanged between the parties. The Full Court also considered the fact that the appeal had not yet been listed for hearing, and that the extension would not delay the appeal. The Full Court found that the extension should have been granted, as there was no undue prejudice to the appellant.

The Full Court's reasoning was based on the fact that the appeal had not yet been listed for hearing, and that the extension would not delay the appeal. The Full Court also found that the appellant had not been prejudiced by the extension, as the documents were served by email on the due date and by post one day later. The Full Court noted that it could not be said that the appellant had not been served, and that service was deemed effective. The Full Court also found that there was no prejudice to the appellant in granting the extension of time, as the hearing of the appeal had not yet been listed.

The final orders made by the Full Court were that the application filed 24 January 2012 was dismissed, and that there be no order as to costs. The Full Court found that the extension of time should have been granted, and that the appeal was dismissed. The Full Court did not make any order as to costs.