BEHN & ZIOMEK
Case
•
[2019] FamCA 298
•10 May 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
BEHN & ZIOMEK [2007] FamCA 102
[2019] FamCA 298
10 May 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of BEHN & ZIOMEK, McClelland DCJ of the District Court made orders concerning the parental responsibility and living arrangements for the child, L. The dispute involved the parents' arrangements for their child, including issues of sole parental responsibility, the child's residence, and supervised time with the father.
The court was required to determine the appropriate orders regarding parental responsibility, the child's residence, the nature and extent of the father's time with the child, and the relocation of the child's residence to Germany. Further issues included the child's name, communication between the parents and the child, removal from an Airport Watchlist, and the parents' conduct towards each other and the child. The court also considered the implications of an existing Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO) in relation to the father's contact with the child.
McClelland DCJ ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child, L, and that the child live with the mother. The father was granted supervised time with the child, to be facilitated through a professional contact service, with specific arrangements for frequency, duration, and cost. The court also permitted the mother to relocate the child to Germany and to travel with the child outside of Australia. Orders were made restraining both parents from denigrating each other and from discussing court proceedings in the child's presence, and prohibiting physical discipline. The court noted that the father was subject to an ADVO, but found that the current orders were not inconsistent with it, clarifying that the father's contact with the child was strictly limited to the times specified in the court's orders or as otherwise agreed in writing.
The court was required to determine the appropriate orders regarding parental responsibility, the child's residence, the nature and extent of the father's time with the child, and the relocation of the child's residence to Germany. Further issues included the child's name, communication between the parents and the child, removal from an Airport Watchlist, and the parents' conduct towards each other and the child. The court also considered the implications of an existing Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO) in relation to the father's contact with the child.
McClelland DCJ ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child, L, and that the child live with the mother. The father was granted supervised time with the child, to be facilitated through a professional contact service, with specific arrangements for frequency, duration, and cost. The court also permitted the mother to relocate the child to Germany and to travel with the child outside of Australia. Orders were made restraining both parents from denigrating each other and from discussing court proceedings in the child's presence, and prohibiting physical discipline. The court noted that the father was subject to an ADVO, but found that the current orders were not inconsistent with it, clarifying that the father's contact with the child was strictly limited to the times specified in the court's orders or as otherwise agreed in writing.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
BEHN & ZIOMEK [2007] FamCA 102
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
2
Kuhl v Zurich Financial Services Australia Ltd
[2011] HCA 11
Kuhl v Zurich Financial Services Australia Ltd
[2011] HCA 11
McGlen-McLeod v Galloway
[2012] NSWCA 368