Bryant and Stapleton (No. 2)

[2008] FamCA 745

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BRYANT & STAPLETON (NO. 2) [2008] FamCA 745

FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Stay

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Bryant

RESPONDENT: Ms Stapleton

FILE NUMBER: MLC 553 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 26 August 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Dessau J

HEARING DATE: 26 August 2008

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: In person

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms Oomen

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Jeremy Harper & Associates

Orders

1. That the father’s application in his Amended Application filed 19 August 2008, including his application to stay orders made by me on 19 June 2008 shall be and is hereby dismissed.

2. That the father shall pay the mother’s costs of this application fixed at $1,500 to be paid as follows:

   (a)$500 on 26 September 2008;

   (b)$500 on 27 October 2008; and

   (c)$500 on 26 November 2008.

3. That a transcript of my reasons for judgment given this day shall be prepared with priority and placed on the court file.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 553 of 2007

MR BRYANT

Applicant

And

MS STAPLETON

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The parties’ child is aged five.  I heard this case about parenting arrangements for her, over five days from 11 to 17 June 2008.  I gave reasons for judgment on 18 June and I made final orders on 19 June 2008.  The upshot of the orders was that the child would continue to live with her mother, and would continue to spend substantial and significant time with her father, although not in the equal shared regime that he sought, and in a configuration that was different from the existing interim orders.

2. On 17 July, the father filed a Notice of Appeal against my decision. 

3. On 31 July he filed an Application in a Case, seeking a stay of my orders of 19 June; a stay of order 3 of interim orders made in the Federal Magistrates Court on 24 June 2006 that restricted his communication with the mother; that order 3 of my orders relating to special occasion time with his daughter be added to the Federal Magistrates Court interim orders; and, that in school holidays, the child spend half of her time with each parent.  His application was supported by an affidavit, also filed on 31 July 2008.

4. The matter came before me on 11 August 2008.  The Independent Children's Lawyer was in court, coincidentally.  No-one else was present because the documents had not yet been served, so I adjourned the case until today.

5. On 19 August 2008, the father filed an amended application in a case, seeking a stay only of the orders in paragraphs 2, 4 and 10 of my final orders made on 19 June.  Paragraph 2 dealt with the regime of time he would spend with…