Birkett-Julius and Julius
[2008] FMCAfam 756
•17 July 2008
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| BIRKETT-JULIUS & JULIUS | [2008] FMCAfam 756 |
| FAMILY LAW – Parenting Orders – who child is to live with – time with the father. |
| Family Law Act 1975, s.60CC |
| Applicant: | MS BIRKETT-JULIUS |
| Respondent: | MR JULIUS |
| File Number: | MLC 5847 of 2008 |
| Judgment of: | Turner FM |
| Hearing date: | 16 July 2008 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 16 July 2008 |
| Delivered at: | Melbourne |
| Delivered on: | 17 July 2008 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr Devries |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | J A Middlemis |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Mr Hannan |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Hillier Quinn Law |
ORDERS
That it is in the best interests of the child [X] born in 2006 that she live with the mother from today until final orders are made in this matter.
Until further order, [X] is to spend time with her father as follows:
(a)Each alternate Sunday from 10.00am to 4.00pm commencing Sunday, 27 July 2008.
(b)From 10.0am to 4.00pm on Father’s day if it is not otherwise provided for in 2(a).
(c)From 10.00am to 2.00pm on 24 December 2008.
(d)Such further or other times as may be agreed between the parties.
(e)The father’s time with [X] shall be exercised in the Bendigo area.
(f)Changeover shall take place in the carpark of McDonalds Restaurant, [address omitted].
AND THE COURT NOTES THAT:
Pursuant to s.65DA(2), the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these orders and details of who can assist parties adjust to and comply with an order are set out in Attachment A hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Birkett-Julius & Julius is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
MLC 5847 of 2008
| MS BIRKETT-JULIUS |
Applicant
And
| MR JULIUS |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Revised from transcript)
The first issue for decision is whether the mother initiated discussions above having the father killed. The next issue is who the child [X] born in 2006 ([X]) should live with pending final determination of the matter. [X] is 20 months old.
The Court heard sworn evidence from the mother referring to alleged discussions about having the father killed. The evidence was tested in cross examination.
The Court accepts that the mother did not initiate those discussions with Ms R.
The Court accepts that Ms R initiated such a discussion on 23 June 2008 and that the mother “treated the suggestion as a joke”.
The Court orders that it is in the best interests of the child [X] that she live with the mother from today until final orders are made in this matter.
Section 60CC factors
Living with the mother will not prevent a meaningful relation between [X] and both parents.
Such arrangement will not expose [X] to physical or psychological harm.
The Court does not have evidence of any views expressed by [X] who is now only 20 months old.
There is no evidence that [X] has a poor relationship with either parent.
There are no practical difficulties or expenses that will result from [X] living with her mother instead of the father until the hearing in March 2009, and final determination.
There is no evidence of lack of capacity of the mother to provide for the emotional and intellectual needs of [X].
Both parents have a loving attitude towards [X] and appreciate the responsibilities of parenthood.
There is no family violence alleged in relation to [X]. It is alleged the mother’s new partner was violent towards the father. That provides concern as to the appropriate place for changeover, when [X] is to spend time with the father. Both parties propose changeovers at McDonalds Restaurant, [address omitted]. That is acceptable.
There are no relevant family violence orders.
Both parents are fulfilling their responsibilities as parents.
The parties separated on 11 January 2007 and [X] has lived with her mother since separation. The father has spent little time with [X] since separation, although it is difficult on the current evidence to determine who is to blame for that. (Affidavit of father sworn 14 July 2008 paragraphs 16-19 and following).
I certify that the preceding sixteen (16) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Turner FM
Associate: E. Wilson-Kwong
Date: 17 July 2008
0
0
1