FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND
FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)Arata & Rex (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1F 583
File number(s): LEC 250 of 2021 Judgment of: HOGAN J Date of judgment: 30 August 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Where interim parenting orders are sought by the father that the child live with him and spend supervised time with the mother – Where the mother sought that the child live with her and spend supervised time with the father – Where the Independent Children’s Lawyer supported the father’s proposal – Where the adult child poses a potential risk to the child the subject of the proceedings – Where final judgment delivery is listed for delivery in four weeks – Where it is ordered that the child live with the father and communicate with the mother by telephone until final orders are delivered Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Cases cited: Banks& Banks (2015) FLC 93-637; [2015] FamCAFC 36 Division: First Instance Number of paragraphs: 23 Date of hearing: 23 August 2024 Place: Brisbane Solicitor for the Applicant: Ms Burgess, Burgess Family Law Respondent: Litigant in person Solicitor for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Ms Burton, Legal Aid NSW ORDERS
LEC 250 of 2021 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR ARATA
Applicant
AND: MS REX
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
HOGAN J
DATE OF ORDER:
30 AUGUST 2024
IT IS ORDERED UNTIL FURTEHR ORDER THAT:
1.The child X (also known as Y), born in 2014, have telephone or video communication with the mother at all times as may be agreed between the parents in writing but, failing agreement, as follows:
(a)at 4.00 pm on 31 August 2024; and
(b)at 4.00 pm on 3 September 2024; and
(c)at 4.00 pm on 6 September 2024; and
(d)at 4.00 pm on 9 September 2024; and
(e)at 4.00 pm on 12 September 2024; and
(f)at 4.00 pm on 15 September 2024; and
(g)at 4.00 pm on 18 September 2024; and
(h)at 4.00 pm on 21 September 2024; and
(i)at 4.00 pm on 24 September 2024,
with the father to initiate the communication and the mother to be available to receive such communication, or on such other occasions as may be agreed between the parents in writing.
THE COURT OTHERWISE ORDERS THAT:
2.The Application in a Proceedings sealed 20 August 2024 is dismissed.
3.The Response to Application in a Proceedings sealed 21 August 2024 is dismissed.
AND IT IS ORDERED THAT:
4.Pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B of the Family Law Act1975 (Cth), the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these Orders and details of who can assist parties to adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached and these particulars are included in these Orders.
IT IS NOTED THAT:
A.There is no Court known by the name “Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia”.
Continue reading Arata & Rex (No 3)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Arata & Rex (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1F 583
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC1F 583
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to determine whether the child should live with Mr Arata or Ms Rex, and the appropriate conditions for any visitation between the child and Ms Rex. The court also needed to consider the potential risk posed by the adult child. Hogan J analysed the evidence presented, including the views of the Independent Children’s Lawyer. The court found that it was in the child's best interest for the child to live with Mr Arata, but also recognised the importance of maintaining communication between the child and Ms Rex.
In light of the above, the court ordered that the child live with Mr Arata and maintain telephone or video communication with Ms Rex under specific conditions until final orders were delivered. The communication schedule was set to occur weekly, with the father initiating the contact, and the mother being available to receive it. The court also dismissed the application and response to the application in a proceeding. The orders included details of obligations, consequences of non-compliance, and sources of assistance for the parties.
Orders
Orders of the court
LEC 250 of 2021
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:
MR ARATA
Applicant
AND:
MS REX
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
HOGAN J
DATE OF ORDER:
30 AUGUST 2024
IT IS ORDERED UNTIL FURTEHR ORDER THAT:
1. The child X (also known as Y), born in 2014, have telephone or video communication with the mother at all times as may be agreed between the parents in writing but, failing agreement, as follows:
(a) at 4.00 pm on 31 August 2024; and
(b) at 4.00 pm on 3 September 2024; and
(c) at 4.00 pm on 6 September 2024; and
(d) at 4.00 pm on 9 September 2024; and
(e) at 4.00 pm on 12 September 2024; and
(f) at 4.00 pm on 15 September 2024; and
(g) at 4.00 pm on 18 September 2024; and
(h) at 4.00 pm on 21 September 2024; and
(i) at 4.00 pm on 24 September 2024,
with the father to initiate the communication and the mother to be available to receive such communication, or on such other occasions as may be agreed between the parents in writing.
THE COURT OTHERWISE ORDERS THAT:
2. The Application in a Proceedings sealed 20 August 2024 is dismissed.
3. The Response to Application in a Proceedings sealed 21 August 2024 is dismissed.
AND IT IS ORDERED THAT:
4. Pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these Orders and details of who can assist parties to adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached and these particulars are included in these Orders.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.