of his 10 July 2023 affidavit. He also deposed to the proposal in paragraph 12 of his 23 September 2024 affidavit.
86 From his answers given to questions put to him in cross-examination the respondent said he and the applicant drove to Sydney after the proposal at an entertainment venue, reaching Sydney on or immediately prior to the date of the alleged ceremony in late December 2023. He gave no evidence of when and in what circumstances he retained the wedding celebrant to perform (on the respondent's version of events) a wedding ceremony two days after the applicant accepted his proposal of the marriage. The respondent gave no evidence of the circumstances in which a photographer was retained. He gave no evidence of how the venue was selected as the venue. He gave no evidence of discussing the venue, the celebrant or the photographer with the applicant. To the contrary, the applicant deposed as follows in paragraph 13 of her 12 September 2023 affidavit –
"I had never met [Mr C] or discussed anything about getting married in Sydney with the respondent."
87 The applicant's evidence about the events of late December 2023 was not entirely logical. On some date after the visit to an event in Queensland, yet on a date not specified, the applicant deposed to a general discussion with the respondent about visiting Sydney. The context of that discussion did not involve marriage, according to the applicant. On her version of events, the respondent proposed to her in late December 2023. She gave that evidence during her viva voce evidence. She did not give any information about the discussions between the respondent and her anterior to their visit to the entertainment venue, especially its purpose. She did not say where his proposal took place. She did not say whether they stayed overnight at the entertainment venue on the date of the proposal in late December 2023 nor did she give details of any discussions about how they were to get to Sydney, when they would leave, when they intended to arrive or where they would stay once they did arrive. The applicant deposed to being told by the respondent that they were to attend a white party in Sydney for which the applicant needed to bring a white dress. She gave next to no information about the events on the date of the alleged ceremony in relation to the event they were attending. When they arrived at the venue it must have been obvious to her that she was not attending a white party because no evidence existed of other attendees dressed in white being present. When she met Mr C and the photographer, it must also have been obvious to her that she was not at
