Buckley and Buckley (No. 2)
Case
•
[2014] FamCA 876
•15 October 2014
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Buckley and Buckley (No. 2) [2014] FamCA 876
[2014] FamCA 876
15 October 2014
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned parenting orders made by Kent J in relation to a child, B, born in July 2005. The dispute involved the father, the mother, and the paternal grandparents, Mr J Buckley and Ms M Buckley.
The court was required to determine the living arrangements for the child, the allocation of parental responsibility for major long-term issues, the nature and extent of the father's time with the child, and the involvement of the paternal grandparents in the child's life. Additionally, the court considered the need for injunctions to protect the father and his parents from the mother, the return of specific documents, and the dismissal of outstanding applications.
Kent J ordered that the child, B, live with the mother. Shared parental responsibility for major long-term issues was to be held by the father, mother, and paternal grandparents. The father was to spend time with the child each alternate Sunday for five hours, commencing at 10:30 am, with changeovers at designated contact centres. This time was to be in the presence of the paternal grandparents and/or paternal family. The court also issued injunctions pursuant to s 68B(1) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) restraining the mother from any contact with the father and his parents, and from entering their residences or places of employment. The father was to be at liberty to be involved with the child’s schooling and extracurricular activities, in the presence of the paternal grandparents and/or paternal family, with these orders authorising contact with relevant providers. All outstanding applications were dismissed, and the Independent Children’s Lawyer was discharged.
The court was required to determine the living arrangements for the child, the allocation of parental responsibility for major long-term issues, the nature and extent of the father's time with the child, and the involvement of the paternal grandparents in the child's life. Additionally, the court considered the need for injunctions to protect the father and his parents from the mother, the return of specific documents, and the dismissal of outstanding applications.
Kent J ordered that the child, B, live with the mother. Shared parental responsibility for major long-term issues was to be held by the father, mother, and paternal grandparents. The father was to spend time with the child each alternate Sunday for five hours, commencing at 10:30 am, with changeovers at designated contact centres. This time was to be in the presence of the paternal grandparents and/or paternal family. The court also issued injunctions pursuant to s 68B(1) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) restraining the mother from any contact with the father and his parents, and from entering their residences or places of employment. The father was to be at liberty to be involved with the child’s schooling and extracurricular activities, in the presence of the paternal grandparents and/or paternal family, with these orders authorising contact with relevant providers. All outstanding applications were dismissed, and the Independent Children’s Lawyer was discharged.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Injunction
-
Costs
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
1
Statutory Material Cited
1
Mickelberg v The Queen
[1989] HCA 35
Mickelberg v The Queen
[1989] HCA 35