CARR & SATCHELL

[2016] FCCA 644

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CARR & SATCHELL [2016] FCCA 644

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Undefended hearing.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s.68B

Applicant: MS CARR

Respondent: MR SATCHELL

File Number: SYC 696 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Henderson

Hearing date: 16 March 2016

Date of Last Submission: 16 March 2016

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 16 March 2016

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Karras Partners Lawyers

ORDERS

1. The child X born (omitted) 2007 live with the mother.

2. Any time the child spends with the father be at the sole discretion of the mother.

3. The mother have sole parental responsibility for the child.

4. The mother is permitted to apply to the Australian Passports Office for passports to issue and be renewed for the child X born (omitted) 2007 in the absence of the consent of the father or otherwise and insofar as it is necessary this order operates as an authority for the mother to do so.

5. The mother be permitted to take the child out of the Commonwealth of Australia on any occasion she deems appropriate without notice to the father.

6. Pursuant to section 68B of the Family Law Act 1975 the father is injuncted and restrained from communicating with the mother or children and mother in any way whatsoever and is injuncted and restrained from approaching the mother or children’s home, school, place of work or any places of extra-curricular activity they may attend from time to time.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 696 of 2014

MS CARR

Applicant

And

MR SATCHELL

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In the matter of Carr & Satchell, I will deal this matter today on an undefended basis.

2. The matter concerns the parenting arrangements for the parties’ child, X born (omitted) 2007. The father is not here today. I am satisfied he is aware of these proceedings as he has, by email to the mother’s solicitor and to the mother, indicated he no longer proposes to involve himself in this matter. He said in his email of 17 September 2015

3. “I propose to have nothing to do with the proceedings and, as far as he is concerned, the mother is a “100 per cent selfish bitch in relation to X and my time with her. Please cancel all legal proceedings. I am not ever going to turn up to Court again. Tell your client to stop wasting money with you, the lawyer. I have retired from the whole case. Please provide documents to sign to end this irritating occurrence.”

4. This was an email sent by the father sent to the mother’s lawyer as marked exhibit N and a similar e-mail of 7 March 2016 marked exhibit “T” in her affidavit filed 11 March 2016. The mother has filed an application in a case seeking undefended orders in relation to parenting. The mother’s affidavit is littered with the most concerning and despicable behaviour of this man, not only towards the mother but also his young daughter. He has constantly, through both text message, email and personally, denigrated the mother. He has had numerous AVOs taken out against him in relation to protection of the mother and the child. He has been banned from attending the child’s school.

5. His behaviour is such that he believes he can do precisely what he likes He sent an e-mail to the mother’s lawyers on 12 May 2015 “If I want to pick up my child I will whenever I want” and threatening the mother that the authorities are watching the mother’s every move.

6. On occasions the mother has allowed the child to attend time with the father, for example, at paragraph 47 of her affidavit of June 2015 the mother agreed for X to be taken outside Sydney with her father for one night. Ultimately the father had her for 2 nights in the (omitted) area, where the father’s family have property. When the child returned home, she said to her mother, “I’ve come to the conclusion Daddy doesn’t care about me. He hardly spent any time with me. I thought he was supposed to be spending time with me and, when I see him, he went off somewhere, leaving me with (omitted) and the kids,” This behaviour has been a constant for X.

7. When she does spend time with the father, he often goes to the pub or goes out with his friends and leaves her with his parents or some other people. Yet he has a view that he can see this child whenever he wants, can send rude, disgusting emails to the mother which she is meant to accept. For example, he sent an email in August 2015:

   Tell her I will be picking X up at 2 pm and she won’t be dropped off till 8.30 pm.

8. There are no orders for that time or agreed arrangement. He just tells the mother what he wants and the mother is meant to comply. After he sent to the mother’s lawyer the email about not participating in the legal proceedings in September 2015, he sent another email to the lawyers on 25 September 2015:

   This weekend, I want to take X to (omitted) Saturday night with me, Sunday night with me back Monday night.

9. The mother, of course, did not agree and so he responds:

   Effing bitch. Terrible mother.

10. The child describes when being at the father’s apartment:

    He slept all day and he kept going on about (omitted), telling me women who leave marriages should be locked up – that the beach depresses me – we should be in the country.

11. He wrote an email to the mother’s lawyers on 22 October 2015:

    That bitch has only given me one kid then stole her. The white woman walked out of a completely okay marriage.

12. I am not sure what sort of “okay marriage” the father is speaking of but it is not the marriage the mother describes.

13. Even the paternal grandmother has spoken rudely to the mother. To her credit, the mother admits she swore at her in around Christmas 2015. The grandmother said to the mother:

    X is asleep. I won’t wake her up for you to collect. All the women in (omitted) think you’re despicable. The day you came in to our lives was the worst day of our lives. X is going to know we are the ones financially supporting her and she’s going to hate you for what you’ve done to her. You know, your father’s sick? Well, I don’t care because I’m not well myself –

14. The grandmother refused to bring the child to the mother and the mother had to wait for some period of time until the grandmother decided she would return the child to her care.

15. The mother says she has heard the father in the background whilst the child is speaking to her grandmother:

    You tell that fucking bitch to deliver X immediately or else.

16. In a telephone call with the grandmother in February 2015 the father called out:

    You tell that fucking bitch I will be collecting X from school at 3 pm today. I will return her home when I am good and ready. How dare you fucking tell me when I can see my daughter.

17. The child complains that the father becomes angry and winds himself up, complains about the mother, swears and treats X in a most despicable fashion due to his difficulties with the mother leaving the relationship.

18. Unsurprisingly the child has said to her mother on many occasions:

    I don’t really like spending time with Dad on Friday afternoons. It’s always stressful and I never know what kind of mood he will be in.

19. Dr G prepared a report in this matter and although he has opined that equal shared parental responsibility would be appropriate and the child could spend time with her father, that is not the view I have come to. I have relied upon Dr G opinion in his report of 10 March 2015 paragraph 64:

    Perhaps the more crucial factor in considering more access between X and her father relates to how his concerning level of psychological dysfunction may impact on X’s psychological wellbeing. Mr Satchell demonstrated multiple concerning personality features including but not limited to egocentrism, narcissism, maladaptive responses to stresses, significant difficulty in regulating his emotion, poor capacity for self-reflection, vindication for perceived injustices done to him and a volatile temper subject to rages in retribution-focused behaviour.

20. It is clear to me from reading this report that Dr G found the father’s behaviour and in his discussions with him at the interview when questioned about the AVO proceedings similar to that described by the mother’s evidence of how he has been with her since the commencement of the relationship. I find that the father’s sense of ownership over X and willingness to use what he appears to see as his right to an equal share of his asset to punish the mother for leaving him provides further cause for concern of Mr Satchell’s impact on X’s psychological wellbeing.

21. Paragraph 65:

    In sum, despite his inflated self-perceptions, the father is likely to be insensitive to X’s needs and have no capacity to regulate his behaviour in her company. Thus, X may not enjoy extended times with him.

    I have formed the view that to expose this child to father’s behaviour is not an order in her best interest and would be perpetrating upon her continuing significant psychological, emotional and perhaps physical harm and clear abuse at times.

22. Looking at the factors I must under the Act, I will rebut the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. I will not require the mother to deal with this man who has no respect for her as a parent, has no respect for the child, does not understand the child, does not come at any decision or action from a child focus only his desire to have retribution against her. It is not practicable or in the child’s interest that that responsibility be shared and I will rebut that presumption.

23. Having so rebutted the presumption, I need not consider an order for equal time or significant and substantial time and I will not so order.

24. I will not consider any order for time when the father has told the Court via emails to the mother’s lawyer he will not participate in the Court proceedings. I do not see any benefit to X of a relationship with her father. It is not beneficial. It is not meaningful. It is damaging and harmful to this child and she has been harmed by being exposed to her father’s aberrant and poor behaviours. That is clear on the evidence of the mother and in Dr G’s report.

25. The wishes of the child are to spend no time with her father. I accept those wishes, I will place weight upon those wishes, and they are noted by the Court. For this child to spend time with her father on any basis would be a significant change to her usual care arrangements, which is she is solely parented, emotionally and psychologically by her mother. Any change would have a deleterious effect on the child’s functioning. The mother and the child need a break from the father and the paternal family’s ranting and ravings to heal from this very damaging and most vindictive marriage breakdown.

26. The father has no capacity to provide for the child’s emotional, psychological or educational needs. The father’s only capacity is to provide for his needs. The father has no insight into the needs of the child and demonstrates his needs will always be paramount and take precedence to anyone else’s needs including his child’s needs.

27. In those circumstances and given the father’s concerning and threatening behaviours, I propose today to issue an order pursuant to section 68B of the Family Law Act 1975 to operate as an AVO order as under the State Courts and the father is hereby injuncted and restrained from approaching the child’s place of residence, education or extracurricular activities she may attend from time to time. The father is injuncted and restrained from approaching the mother’s residence or any place of work or extracurricular activities she may attend from time to time. Should the father breach this order, the State Police have authority to arrest the father without warrant. That injunction will remain in place permanently unless the mother herself in writing consents to a change.

I certify that the preceding twenty-seven (27) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Henderson

Date: 31 March 2016