Brodie & Kermond
[2022] FedCFamC1F 481
•26 May 2022
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia
(DIVISION 1)
Brodie & Kermond [2022] FedCFamC1F 481
File number(s): BRC 2237 of 2022 Judgment of: BAUMANN J Date of judgment: 26 May 2022 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – ADOPTION – Leave to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld) Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 60G Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 3 Date of hearing: 26 May 2022 Place: Brisbane Solicitor for the First Applicant: Litigant in person Solicitor for the Second Applicant: Litigant in person ORDERS
BRC 2237 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR BRODIE
First Applicant
MS BRODIE
Second Applicant
AND: MR KERMOND (DECEASED)
Respondent
order made by:
BAUMANN J
DATE OF ORDER:
26 MAY 2022
THE COURT ORDERS:
1.That pursuant to s 60G of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) the First Applicant, Mr Brodie be granted leave to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld) for the adoption of the child, X born 2011.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Brodie & Kermond has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BAUMANN J:
These proceedings relate to a little girl called X who was born in 2011. She has therefore now turned 10 years of age, soon to be 11 years of age. The Applicant step-father of X and the biological mother (who is the Second Applicant to the Application) commenced cohabitation in early 2014 when the child was approximately two and a half years of age. At that stage, on the evidence which I accept, the child was having some time sporadically with the biological father, Mr Kermond. Sadly, Mr Kermond passed away in 2015. Notwithstanding his passing, and to the credit of the mother and no doubt it has been supported by Mr Brodie, as best they could, they have sought to maintain some connection between the child and the biological father’s family, particularly at special events such as Christmas and on birthdays.
The child has, as a result of the cohabitation in early 2014, been a member of the household that comprises Mr Brodie as the father figure and, of course, the mother. She calls Mr Brodie, not surprisingly, Dad. In all respects she appears to be developing well, enjoys sports, an interest that she shares with the Applicant, and is currently attending B School at Suburb C. That was the decision made by the parties and one which I have no doubt she is benefiting from. In the circumstances of this case the law requires parties seeking to adopt a child in Queensland to seek the leave of what is now the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.
In my view it is in the best interests of this child that leave be given as sought in the Application filed by Mr Brodie on 1 March 2022, namely, that pursuant to Section 60G of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the First Applicant be granted leave to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld) for the adoption of the child, X born in 2011 by the First Applicant, Mr Brodie.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Baumann. Associate:
Dated: 8 July 2022
0
0
1