WHIDDEN & ROUGHEAD

In the Family Court of Australia, Ms Whidden (the applicant) sought to dismiss her substantive application and Mr Roughead's (the respondent) response. The dispute concerned the finalisation of financial matters following the parties' relationship, involving several entities and disagreements over valuations and disclosure. The court was required to determine whether to dismiss the proceedings as sought by the applicant, or to ensure finality of the hearing given the respondent's desire to proceed with his orders.

The court considered the applicant's inability to fund further legal and valuation costs, and her desire to discontinue her application. However, it also acknowledged the respondent's wish to have the matter finalised, particularly given the parties' continued financial entanglement through directorships and shareholdings in various entities. The court noted that while the applicant could file a Notice of Discontinuance, this would not resolve the respondent's outstanding claims.

Justice Macmillan reasoned that the matter required a final hearing to achieve a just and timely resolution of the parties' financial relationship, despite the applicant's financial difficulties and the history of interlocutory disputes. The court emphasised the need for finality, given the court's limited resources and the protracted nature of the proceedings since 2016. The court also noted that the respondent's ability to pay for valuations and the applicant's allegations of misleading conduct were matters requiring evidence.

Consequently, the court dismissed the applicant's application for dismissal of the proceedings. Instead, it made orders adjourning the respondent's application for a hearing on 6 September 2018, requiring the respondent to provide certain financial documents to the applicant by 20 July 2018. The court also extended the time for both parties to file and serve their trial material, aiming to ensure the matter was ready for the final hearing.