Bryce & Bryce

Case

[2020] FamCA 653

31 July 2020


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Bryce & Bryce [2020] FamCA 653 [2020] FamCA 653 31 July 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Bryce & Bryce*, Bennett J considered interim parenting arrangements for three children. The dispute arose following the release of a family report in which the children expressed fears of physical harm from their mother and, conversely, fears that the father and his partner would be harmed or killed by associates of the mother's partner. The ten-year-old child also reported comments from the mother regarding his fear of her stabbing him with a knife. The family report had not yet been tested by cross-examination, and the final hearing was scheduled for three months later.

The court was required to determine whether there was an unacceptable risk of physical harm to the children, the father, or his partner by or at the behest of the mother in the interim period. Additionally, the court had to consider its obligation to have regard to the views of the children, the necessity for evidence of these views to be adduced, and the requirement to provide a safe and scaffolded environment for ascertaining and presenting those views to the court. The court also noted the absence of statutory safeguards to protect children from the adverse impact of their expressed views becoming known to parents.

Bennett J reasoned that while the children's views are mandatory considerations under Australian law and international obligations such as Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the current lack of protective mechanisms undermined the children's right to express their views freely. The court found that in the short term, the risk to the children's emotional wellbeing if they spent time with the mother outweighed the mother's right to procedural fairness. Consequently, the court ordered the suspension of weekly face-to-face time between the children and the mother pending further order. Electronic communication was to be recorded by the father. The court also made detailed orders regarding the dissemination of the family report and the process for cross-examination of the Family Consultant.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Evidence

Legal Concepts

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Natural Justice

  • Appeal

  • Remedies

  • Expert Evidence

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

4

Eastick & Burrows [2021] FamCA 458
WALLIN & WALLIN [2020] FamCA 774
Tai & Bo [2024] FedCFamC1F 474
Cases Cited

2

Statutory Material Cited

3

Harvey & Harvey [2018] FamCA 516
R & R: Children's Wishes [2000] FamCA 43