Bilson & Sarsgaard (No 2)

Case

[2018] FamCA 282

2 May 2018


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Bilson & Sarsgaard (No 2) [2018] FamCA 282 [2018] FamCA 282 2 May 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Bilson & Sarsgaard (No 2)*, Hogan J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia made final orders concerning the parenting arrangements for three children. The dispute centred on the living arrangements, parental responsibility, and time the children would spend with each parent.

The court was required to determine the primary residence of the children, the allocation of parental responsibility for significant long-term issues, and the nature and extent of the children's time and communication with the father. Additionally, the court needed to establish protocols for decision-making regarding the children's welfare, communication between the parents, and the costs associated with supervised contact.

Hogan J ordered that the children live with the mother and that she have sole parental responsibility for most major long-term issues, with specific procedural requirements for consultation with the father. Equal shared parental responsibility was retained for the children's names and changes to living arrangements impacting time with the father. The father was granted sole responsibility for decisions regarding the children's day-to-day care while they are with him. The children were to spend time and communicate with the father on an alternate weekend basis, supervised by an agreed-upon supervisor or contact centre, with the father bearing the costs. The orders also detailed communication protocols, including telephone and Skype contact, and mandated that neither parent denigrate the other to or in front of the children.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Jurisdiction

  • Natural Justice

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Remedies

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

3

Statutory Material Cited

1

Champness & Hanson [2009] FamCAFC 96
M v M [1988] HCA 68
Cox & Pedrana [2013] FamCAFC 48