BARTELS & SCHOLZ

[2011] FamCA 181

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BARTELS & SCHOLZ [2011] FamCA 181

FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN – where judgment has been reserved – where the father seeks interim orders that there be a reintroduction of supervised time with the children – best interests – orders that the children recommence having supervised time with the father at a contact centre.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Bartels

RESPONDENT: Ms Scholz

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Barr Lawyers

FILE NUMBER: ADC 4998 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 9 March 2011

PLACE DELIVERED: Adelaide

PLACE HEARD: Adelaide

JUDGMENT OF: Dawe J

HEARING DATE: 9 March 2011

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT: In person

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Childs

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

COUNSEL FOR THE ICL: Ms Cocks

Orders

UPON NOTING that judgment is reserved before the Honourable Justice Dawe and pending delivery of judgment

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. All previous orders in relation to the suspension of the father spending time with the children V and E are continued.

1. The father spend time with both of the children once a fortnight supervised by and at the H Contact Centre on a Saturday or Sunday supervised at all times by a staff member of the H Contact Centre to commence as soon as the contact centre can permit.

1. The mother is restrained and an injunction is granted restraining her from discussing any allegations with or in the presence or hearing of the children.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Bartels & Scholz is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT ADELAIDE

FILE NUMBER: ADC 4998 of 2008

Mr Bartels

Applicant

And

Ms Scholz

Respondent

EX-TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. When the matter was reserved for the resumption of this part of the trial, I made orders on 1 December 2010 suspending all previous orders that the father spend time with the children and directing the time spent to be taken at the H Contact Centre on a Saturday or Sunday, with other orders made during the period of the adjournment about the mother not discussing the allegations with the children.  The father has again raised the issue of the orders to be made pending judgment.

2. I understand Mr Bartel’s application is that pending judgment that the previous order for supervised time resume.  Pending the delivery of my judgment, however, it is probable that the time the children spend with the father, will commence at the H Contact Centre.  I am aware that the children have not spent time with the father since 3 July last year. This is now a long and significant period. 

3. I therefore believe that it is in the children’s best interest for a reintroduction of time with the father to take place, but it is also in the best interests of the children that that reintroduction of time with the father be at a place that can provide security both for the mother, if she retains any concerns about the resumption of time with the father, and indirectly therefore for the children. 

4. Without pre-empting the judgment, which I am now required to consider in relation to all of the matters, I believe that pending the delivery of the judgment that it is in the best interests of the children that they have an opportunity to spend time with the father but that that opportunity should be on condition that it is at the H Contact Centre and supervised at all time by a staff member.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Dawe delivered on 9 March 2011.

Associate: 

Date:  17 March 2011