BEAD & GAFFIN

[2021] FCCA 768

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BEAD & GAFFIN [2021] FCCA 768

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Parenting proceedings - proceedings transferred to the Family Court of Australia - Order made.

Legislation:

Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), s.39(4)

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.8.02

Cases cited:

Morris & Rosetti [2017] FamCA 249

Applicant: MS BEAD

Respondents: MR GAFFIN AND MS GAFFIN

File Number: PAC 1564 of 2020

Judgment of: Judge Newbrun

Hearing date: 31 March 2021

Date of Last Submission: 31 March 2021

Delivered at: Parramatta

Delivered on: 31 March 2021

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Mr Smith, Coleman Greig Lawyers

The Respondents appeared in person Mr Gaffin and Ms Gaffin

Counsel for the Independent Children’s Lawyer:	Mr Blank of Counsel
Solicitors for the Independent Children’s Lawyer	Ms Hernandez, Claremont Legal

ORDERS

1. By consent, these proceedings are transferred to the Parramatta Registry of the Family Court of Australia with the matter to be mentioned on 13 May 2021 at 10:15am.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PARRAMATTA

PAC 1564 of 2020

MS BEAD

Applicant

And

MR GAFFIN AND MS GAFFIN

Respondents

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. The within Reasons for Judgment relate to this Court’s Order of today that these parenting proceedings be transferred to the Family Court of Australia at Parramatta. The Court was informed by the Mother’s solicitor that the Mother proposes to file and serve an Amended Initiating Application seeking to also seek Orders for property adjustment.

2. All parties and the ICL sought an Order that the proceedings be transferred to the Family Court of Australia. The Father contended that the Newcastle Registry of the Family Court of Australia should be the preferred Registry. The Mother contended that Parramatta should be the preferred Registry.  The Court, giving brief Reasons, determined that the Parramatta Registry should be the relevant Registry for the Family Court of Australia.

3. The subject Children are 7 in number, albeit that the eldest Child is aged 17 years.

4. The Father and the Paternal Grandparents are legally unrepresented.

5. There is an ICL representing the Children.

6. The Father proposes to call at least two or three lay witnesses, two caseworkers from FACS, and his two treating psychologists. The Mother proposes to call her partner, her brother and the Maternal Grandmother. The Paternal Grandparents propose to call one lay witness and their daughter.  The ICL proposes to call the Family Report Writer, and possibly the Child Inclusive Conference Family Consultant to give evidence.

Issues in dispute

1. The issues in dispute in the parenting proceedings include the following:

   a)The nature and extent of each parties’ relationship with each Child;

   b)The nature and extent of alleged family violence perpetrated by the parties towards each other, and the relevance of same for each party’s parenting capacity (and there has been contested AVO proceedings against the Father);

   c)The parenting capacity of each party;