Bagshaw & Halcombe
[2023] FedCFamC1F 282
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Bagshaw & Halcombe [2023] FedCFamC1F 282
File number(s): BRC 16244 of 2022 Judgment of: BAUMANN J Date of judgment: 27 March 2023 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – ADOPTION – Leave to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld) Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 7 Date of hearing: 27 March 2023 Place: Brisbane Solicitor for the Applicants: Omb Solicitors Solicitor for the Respondent: Litigant in person (did not participate) ORDERS
BRC 16244 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR BAGSHAW
First Applicant
MS CURRIE
Second Applicant
AND: MR HALCOMBE
Respondent
order made by:
BAUMANN J
DATE OF ORDER:
27 MARCH 2023
THE COURT ORDERS:
1.That the First Applicant and Second Applicant be granted leave to proceed ex parte.
2.That pursuant to s 60G of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) the First Applicant, Mr Bagshaw be granted leave to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld) for the adoption of the children, X born 2014 and Y born 2016.
3.That the parties henceforth exclusively use the name X CURRIE BAGSHAW as the name of the said child (until now known as X HALCOMBE), and not cause or permit any other person to use any names other than X CURRIE BAGSHAW.
4.That the parties henceforth exclusively use the name Y CURRIE BAGSHAW as the name of the said child (until now known as Y HALCOMBE), and not cause or permit any other person to use any names other than Y CURRIE BAGSHAW.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Bagshaw & Halcombe has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Settled from the oral reasons delivered)
BAUMANN J:
This is an Application made by Mr Bagshaw and Ms Currie, who is the biological mother of two children, Y born 2016 and X born 2014. I have the benefit today of written submissions on behalf of the Applicants by the solicitor for the Applicants.
I first deal with the application to dispense with the requirements of service. It is quite unusual in a matter like this to dispense with service, in my view, and it should be because of the change of status that even leave to adopt, whilst not adoption, enlivens. However, it is clear from all the material that there have been a number of proceedings in courts since the mother says she separated from the biological father of the children, Mr Halcombe, in 2015. That has included a number of proceedings before the State Magistrates Court, an application for divorce to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (as it was then known).
Orders have also been made in relation to the mother having sole parental responsibility and for the children to live with her and spend no time or communicate with the father, made by Judge Lapthorn on an undefended basis, and with no service having been effected upon the father. Those Orders were made on 3 October 2017.
Therefore, in the circumstances of this case, I am prepared to proceed ex parte.
Before the Court grants leave to adopt, I am required to be satisfied that to do so would be in the best interests of the children. It is quite clear, and although Mr Bagshaw has been a friend of the mother since the birth of the children, and I infer, an emotional supporter of the mother, it was not until January 2018 that they acknowledged they commenced a “relationship”. They moved in together in March 2018 and have been a couple since.
I have no doubt and have no difficulty in accepting the evidence that Y and X regard Mr Bagshaw as their father figure. There is no evidence that they have ever spent time with their biological father since their parents separated. Of course, the mother says there is a context for the reason she separated from the biological father, which was domestic violence perpetrated upon her and drug use by the biological father.
Be that as it may, that is many years ago, and I am satisfied it is in the best interests of the two children, on the evidence before me, that I give leave to adopt to the Applicants so they can then begin the journey through the State system. I make orders accordingly in accordance with the Application.
I certify that the preceding seven (7) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the ex parte Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Baumann. Associate:
Dated: 21 April 2023
0
0
0