Bonner and Wurth

[2011] FamCA 580

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BONNER & WURTH [2011] FamCA 580

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Final Consent Orders made including relocation.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Bonner

RESPONDENT: Ms Wurth

FILE NUMBER: BRC 10421 of 2010

DATE DELIVERED: 13 July 2011

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Murphy J

HEARING DATE: 13 July 2011

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr M Orchard as Town Agent for Dean Kath Kohler Solicitors

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Mr M Orchard of

Clewett Lawyers

Orders

IT IS ORDERED BY CONSENT THAT

1. Pursuant to Rule 10.17 of the Family Law Rules 2004, Orders, declarations and notations be made in terms of the document titled “Minutes of Consent” sealed and attached hereto.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. All extant applications be otherwise dismissed and removed from the list of cases awaiting finalisation.

2. All subpoenaed documents be returned to the persons or institutions from which they emanated and all exhibits are returned to the person or persons who tendered the same.

3. Pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B, 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 the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

IT IS DIRECTED THAT

1. The Minutes of Consent remain upon the Court file.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER:  BRC 10421 of 2010

Mr Bonner

Applicant

And

Ms Wurth

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. At the callover of a number of matters awaiting trial before me this morning, this matter was due to be set down and would, in usual course, have been set down for trial for two days in August.  At the hearing this morning, Mr Orchard, solicitor, appeared for the mother and provided a letter of instruction from the solicitors for the father in circumstances where the parties have, with the assistance of their respective legal practitioners, been able to agree on final orders in respect of the child K, who is the subject of these proceedings and who is currently aged seven.

2. The issue in dispute between the parties can conveniently be described as one of relocation.  The parties currently live in the Town 1 Southern Queensland region, and the mother seeks to relocate with the child to Town 2 North Queensland.  During the course of the proceedings, a report was obtained from Mr C, psychologist.  I am told by Mr Orchard that, in that report, Mr C canvasses various issues with respect to the impact on K of the relocation and issues relating to the nature and extent of the relationship she should have with her father in that event.

3. The orders as agreed to by the parties with the assistance of their respective legal practitioners and, undoubtedly, with the assistance of the report of Mr C to which I’ve just referred, provide for parental responsibility to be shared equally between the parties. The orders also outline a mechanism for the parties to contact and discuss all such issues as might arise between them and a means to resolve any such conflict as might arise between them.  Otherwise, the orders provide that K be permitted to relocate with her mother to the Town 2 area, specifically, within 100 kilometres of Town 2 and for the father to spend significant amounts of time with her such as might be permitted by reference to the geographical distance separating them.

4. In the circumstances just described, I am satisfied that the consent orders provide for arrangements which are in the best interests of K, given the difficult issues which these parents have had to confront in the circumstances of this case.  I commend the parents and their respective legal practitioners for their capacity to put their individual interests aside in the best interests of K and for their capacity to be able to work together to arrive at a consent arrangement which will hopefully work in K’s benefit into the future.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Murphy delivered on 13 July 2011.

Associate: 

Date:  26 July 2011