FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Butler & Wanzel [2024] FedCFamC2F 1207
File number: SYC 9251 of 2022 Judgment of: JUDGE LIOUMIS Date of judgment: 12 September 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the parties agree that the mother should hold sole parental responsibility for the child and that the child should live with the mother – Whether the child should spend time with the father – Where the child has never met the father – Where there are allegations by the mother of significant family violence perpetrated by the father, including coercive and controlling family violence – Where findings are made that the father poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the child and the mother as a result of family violence – Where the father has long-term mental health issues – Where findings are made that the father’s mental health presents an unacceptable risk of harm to the child’s safety – Where the Court cannot be satisfied that the father is drug-free – Where the child is vulnerable due to developmental delays – Where orders are made that the child shall spend no time with nor communicate with the father – Where injunctive orders are made pursuant to section 68B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60B, 60CA, 60CC, 65AA, 65D, 68B
Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW)
Cases cited: Amador & Amador (2009) 43 Fam LR 268
Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336
Keating & Keating (2019) FLC 93-894
Ramzi & Moussa [2022] FedCFamC2F 1473
Division: Division 2 Family Law Number of paragraphs: 238 Date of hearing: 6, 7 & 8 May 2024 Place: Sydney Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Schonell of Counsel Solicitor for the Applicant: Long Saad Woodbridge Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Blank of Counsel Solicitor for the Respondent: Hennikers Solicitors Solicitor for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Ms McMullen, Legal Aid NSW Domestic Violence Unit ORDERS
SYC 9251 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: MS BUTLER
Applicant
AND: MR WANZEL
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE LIOUMIS
DATE OF ORDER:
12 SEPTEMBER 2024
BY CONSENT AND ON A FINAL BASIS THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Mother shall have sole parental responsibility for the child Y born in 2022 (“the child”).
2.The child shall live with the Mother.
ON A FINAL BASIS THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
3.The child shall spend no time with nor communicate with the Father.
4.Pursuant to section 68B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the Father be and is hereby restrained by injunction from:
(a)Approaching or attempting to contact the Mother or the child except through a legal practitioner;
(b)Coming within 200 metres of the Mother and/or the child, including but not limited to the Mother’s residence and the child’s daycare, preschool or school; and
(c)Approaching the Mother, in the event that both parties are present at a location…
Continue reading Butler & Wanzel
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Butler & Wanzel [2024] FedCFamC2F 1207
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC2F 1207
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to consider several legal issues, primarily whether contact between the father and the child would be in the child's best interests, given the findings of family violence and the father's mental health issues. The court also needed to determine if there were circumstances under which the father could safely engage with the child, considering the mother's allegations and the father's history. The court's reasoning involved a detailed analysis of the evidence presented, including expert reports and witness testimonies, to assess the risks posed by the father and the vulnerability of the child. The court concluded that contact with the father would not be in the child's best interests due to the significant risks involved. The court was also concerned about the father's inability to remain drug-free and the potential impact of his mental health issues on the child.
In light of the findings, the court ordered that the child shall spend no time with nor communicate with the father. Additionally, injunctive orders were made to protect the mother and the child from the father, prohibiting him from approaching or contacting them except through a legal practitioner, coming within 200 metres of them, and approaching the mother if they are present at the same location. The court also granted the mother leave to share relevant documents with professionals involved with the child. All outstanding applications were dismissed, and the proceedings were removed from the list of matters awaiting finalisation. The orders reflect the court's determination to protect the child from the identified risks posed by the father.
Orders
Orders of the court
SYC 9251 of 2022
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:
MS BUTLER
Applicant
AND:
MR WANZEL
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE LIOUMIS
DATE OF ORDER:
12 SEPTEMBER 2024
BY CONSENT AND ON A FINAL BASIS THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The Mother shall have sole parental responsibility for the child Y born in 2022 (“the child”).
2. The child shall live with the Mother.
ON A FINAL BASIS THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
3. The child shall spend no time with nor communicate with the Father.
4. Pursuant to section 68B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the Father be and is hereby restrained by injunction from:
(a) Approaching or attempting to contact the Mother or the child except through a legal practitioner;
(b) Coming within 200 metres of the Mother and/or the child, including but not limited to the Mother’s residence and the child’s daycare, preschool or school; and
(c) Approaching the Mother, in the event that both parties are present at a location at the same time.
5. The Mother has leave to provide a copy of the Single Expert Report prepared by Ms B dated 25 January 2024, and the Reasons for Judgment published at the conclusion of the proceedings, to any child and family professional and/or psychologist upon whom the child may attend for the purpose of understanding and airing his views in relation to the parenting arrangements.
6. All outstanding applications are dismissed and the proceedings are removed from the list of matters awaiting finalisation.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.