C. Struthers

This endorsement addresses a procedural conference concerning the unilateral cancellation of a motion date booked via Calendly.

The court emphasized that opposing counsel cannot unilaterally cancel a scheduled hearing date without consent, as per the Central West (CW) Notice to the Profession and Parties.

The judge clarified that the court relies on counsel's undertakings in Calendly regarding attempts to agree on mutually convenient dates, and that a consent from opposing counsel is not a prerequisite for booking a motion.

The court strongly condemned the abuse of the Calendly scheduling system, outlining various forms of misconduct, and warned of serious consequences, including cost awards or other sanctions, for non-compliance with scheduling rules and undertakings.

Following separation after an eight‑year marriage with three children, the applicant commenced proceedings after the respondent unilaterally reduced child and spousal support agreed to in minutes of settlement.

The principal issue at trial was the respondent’s income for support purposes, where evidence showed undeclared gratuities and reduced post‑separation employment.

The court found the respondent intentionally under‑employed and imputed income based on historical earnings and earning capacity.

Child support was recalculated based on imputed income, and spousal support continued at the amount agreed in the parties’ settlement.

The applicant’s claim for equalization of alleged missing cash kept in the matrimonial home was dismissed for insufficient proof.