WEMPLE & DAUTRY

The case of Wemple & Dautry involved multiple applications before Judge Tonkin. The primary dispute concerned an application for leave to extend time to file property adjustment proceedings under section 44 of the *Family Law Act 1975*, where the parties had separated in September 2010 and proceedings were commenced in March 2014, significantly outside the 18-month statutory limit. Additionally, there was an application to re-open parenting proceedings, a request to stay contravention applications due to non-compliance with court orders, and an administrative law matter concerning an appeal from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The court was required to determine whether to grant leave to extend time for the property application, considering the principles of hardship and prejudice to the respondent and any third parties. It also needed to assess whether there had been a material change in circumstances justifying the re-opening of final parenting orders, and whether to grant a stay of contravention applications. Finally, the court had to consider an application to amend grounds of appeal in an administrative law matter and make orders regarding security for costs and the listing of the appeal.

Regarding the property application, the court refused leave to extend time, finding that the applicant had not established sufficient hardship to warrant the exercise of discretion in her favour, and that the respondent would be prejudiced by such an extension. The application to re-open parenting proceedings was dismissed as no material change in circumstances was found to justify further litigation, adhering to the principles established in *Rice* and *Asplund*. A stay was granted on the contravention applications pending payment of a prior costs order. Leave to amend the grounds of appeal in the administrative law matter was granted, and the appeal was listed for hearing.