Carper and Jackman

[2010] FamCA 1045

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CARPER & JACKMAN [2010] FamCA 1045

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Carper

RESPONDENT: Ms Jackman

FILE NUMBER: SYC 7145 of 2010

DATE DELIVERED: 15 November 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Watts J

HEARING DATE: 15 November 2010

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: York Family Law

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms Stolier, counsel

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Newport Law

Orders

1. The application the father made by way of an amended document today seeking an extension on a pending further order basis, of a further one night in a fortnightly period during school term, be dismissed.

2. The children spend time with their father from 12 noon on 29 December 2010 to 12 noon 13 January 2011.

3. The mother have an extra four days at the end of the January 2011 school holidays.  The mother may make that time available to the father if she so chooses and gives him reasonable notice of her intention to do so. 

4. The solicitors for the parties confer for the purposes of identifying an appropriate post separation parenting orders program at which the parties may attend and the parties attend that program and comply with any reasonable directions of the program provider until the program is completed.

5. Order A made by Cleary J on 28 September 2010 continue pending further order.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Carper & Jackman is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 7145 of 2010

MR CARPER

Applicant

and

MS JACKMAN

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter I have before me two interim applications by the father.  The first interim application seeks that pending further order, the three children, N, E and J, aged 11, 10 and 8 respectively, to spend time with him from Friday night to Monday each alternate week and from Wednesday overnight to Thursday morning in the other week during school term. 

2. The orders made by consent pending further order by Cleary J on 28 September 2010 put in place an arrangement which was similar to that but was one night less than that.  The mother has indicated that the children have settled well into the new arrangement.

3. On perusal of the material, it is very clear that the level of communication between the parties at the current time is very poor.  Hopefully, by the time this matter gets to a final hearing, if in fact that actually happens, the parties will have worked on their communication skills, particularly through the communication book that has been introduced and will have got to a position where maybe some more extended time can be contemplated.

4. The new arrangements are very new.  I think they should be allowed to settle and, in my view, the current communication between the parties does not point in the direction, on an interim basis, of extending the amount of time the children spend with their father.

5. In relation to the holiday issues, I can understand the mother’s angst that the father, in the face of a clear order to the contrary, simply went ahead and booked passage on a cruise that was a day or two earlier than he may have otherwise been entitled to time under the orders.  I accept at the time the father booked there may have been some fluidity in the dates the children were to be with each parent.  The parties did not know exactly when school was breaking up.

6. The detriment to the children on this occasion of not being flexible and allowing the children to go on the cruise that is booked is not so great that I will stand in the way of that happening and I will allow the children’s time with their father to commence at a date which I understand is 29 December.  I will allow that to be changed on the basis that there is make-up time to the mother at the other end of January.  The father has offered four days.  The father should not assume that unilateral actions, such as he took on this occasion, will lead to a similar outcome on a subsequent occasion. 

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Watts delivered on 15 November 2010.

Associate: 

Date:  19.11.2010