Buckley and Buckley

[2014] FamCA 180

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BUCKLEY & BUCKLEY [2014] FamCA 180

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Undefended Hearing – Where the Mother has not complied with parenting orders – Where the Mother has not actively participated in the proceedings – Where orders are made for substituted service upon the Mother

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Buckley

RESPONDENT:	Ms Buckley
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:	Mr Grainger

FILE NUMBER: BRC 3227 of 2011

DATE DELIVERED: 24 March 2014

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Kent J

HEARING DATE: 24 March 2014

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Linklater-Steele

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

JMW Legal

THE RESPONDENT:

No appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT

CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Legal Aid Queensland

Orders

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Parties given leave to inspect documents produced on subpoenae issued to the Department of Education, Training and Employment and the Brisbane Catholic Education Centre.

1. The proceedings be adjourned for final hearing before the Honourable Justice Bell, if possible, at 10.00 am on 4 July 2014 at the Brisbane Registry of the Family Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT:

1. Pursuant to Rule 7.18 of the Family Law Rules 2004, that personal service upon the Mother of all relevant material be dispensed with and an Order for substituted service be granted, such that service upon the Mother be deemed effected by:

a.   the solicitor for the Father mailing a copy of this Order to the last known residential address of the Mother at I Street, Suburb Y together with a letter informing the Mother that this matter has been adjourned to 10.00 am on 4 July 2014 for the hearing of the Father’s application for final orders; and

b.   by the solicitor for the Father mailing to the maternal grandmother, Ms N at I Street, Suburb Y a copy of the documents referred to in clause 3(a) above.

NOTATION:

A.In the event the Mother does not appear at the hearing on 4 July 2014, this matter may proceed on an undefended basis.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Buckley & Buckley has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRC 3227 of 2011

Mr Buckley

Applicant

And

Ms Buckley

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These parenting proceedings proceeded to a final trial before his Honour Bell J, commencing on 30 May until 4 June 2013.  His Honour pronounced interim parenting orders and delivered reasons for judgment on 21 June 2013.

2. In the substantive parenting proceedings, there were allegations of the child being at an unacceptable risk in the unsupervised care or time with the Father.  That allegation was the subject of the issues dealt with by Bell J in the substantive trial of the proceedings referred to. 

3. I note also that throughout the proceedings, the interests of the child have been independently represented by an Independent Children’s Lawyer, pursuant to section 68L of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

4. His Honour Bell J made orders which contemplated the matter coming back to his Honour after certain processes set out in those orders were followed.  Those processes included a further family report being obtained for the purpose of the matter being further considered by his Honour after some three months had elapsed from the time of his orders.

5. In the result, it is clear on the evidence before me that is referred to by the Father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer, that the Mother has been

   
   

   non-compliant with the processes that were contemplated by the orders made by Bell J to facilitate the further determination of this matter in the interests of the subject child.  His Honour has, in the recent past, made a series of orders in circumstances where it seemed that the Mother had chosen not to actively participate in the proceedings and moreover had sought to avoid the proceedings and the further processes under contemplation.

6. His Honour contemplated and made information orders and the like in the lead up to today’s date.  In the result, the Father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer today seek further orders which would enable there to be substituted service upon the mother of the relevant material and relevant applications made in the recent past but also, more particularly, service upon the Mother on a substituted basis of this order which will provide for the Father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer to proceed to have further final parenting orders heard and determined on an undefended basis, given the Mother’s apparent unwillingness to cooperate further in the proceedings. 

7. For these reasons I make the Orders set out at the commencement of them.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Kent delivered on 24 March 2014.

Associate: 

Date:  24 March 2014