BURNHAM & PARCH
Case
•
[2015] FCCA 1812
•3 July 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Burnham and Parch [2015] FCCA 1812
[2015] FCCA 1812
3 July 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned parenting orders for a child, X, born in 2003, and was heard by Judge Small. The dispute involved the arrangements for the child's living situation, parental responsibility, and time spent with each parent.
The court was required to determine the appropriate parenting orders, including whether to discharge previous orders, the nature of parental responsibility, where the child would live, and the specific arrangements for the child to spend time with the father. Additionally, the court needed to consider the role of a Parenting Orders Program, the potential for future court intervention if agreement could not be reached, and various ancillary matters such as school attendance, communication between parents, and the father's smoking habits. The court also addressed injunctions relating to parental conduct towards the child and the disclosure of court documents.
Judge Small discharged all previous parenting orders and made orders for equal shared parental responsibility. The child was to live with the mother. Both parents were directed to attend a Parenting Orders Program to attempt to reach an agreement regarding the child's time with the father. If no agreement was reached after six months of active participation, and the child was not spending regular time with the father, specific, progressively increasing time arrangements with the father were to commence, subject to the father's work roster and leave. The orders also included detailed provisions for time on birthdays, Christmas, and other holidays, as well as injunctions restraining the father from smoking near the child and both parents from denigrating each other in the child's presence. The court also made orders regarding school reports, attendance at school events, notification of illness or injury, change of address, and the mother's obligation to seek psychiatric or psychological treatment. The Independent Children's Lawyer's appointment was discharged.
The court was required to determine the appropriate parenting orders, including whether to discharge previous orders, the nature of parental responsibility, where the child would live, and the specific arrangements for the child to spend time with the father. Additionally, the court needed to consider the role of a Parenting Orders Program, the potential for future court intervention if agreement could not be reached, and various ancillary matters such as school attendance, communication between parents, and the father's smoking habits. The court also addressed injunctions relating to parental conduct towards the child and the disclosure of court documents.
Judge Small discharged all previous parenting orders and made orders for equal shared parental responsibility. The child was to live with the mother. Both parents were directed to attend a Parenting Orders Program to attempt to reach an agreement regarding the child's time with the father. If no agreement was reached after six months of active participation, and the child was not spending regular time with the father, specific, progressively increasing time arrangements with the father were to commence, subject to the father's work roster and leave. The orders also included detailed provisions for time on birthdays, Christmas, and other holidays, as well as injunctions restraining the father from smoking near the child and both parents from denigrating each other in the child's presence. The court also made orders regarding school reports, attendance at school events, notification of illness or injury, change of address, and the mother's obligation to seek psychiatric or psychological treatment. The Independent Children's Lawyer's appointment was discharged.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Injunction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Burnham and Parch [2015] FCCA 1812
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
1
Statutory Material Cited
2
KEDVES & SEGAL
[2020] FCCA 67
KEDVES & SEGAL
[2020] FCCA 67