Carriel & Lendrum

In this case, the appellant mother sought to vary the final parenting orders made in 2010. The trial judge dismissed the application based on the principle established in Rice & Asplund, which suggests that an application to vary or discharge parenting orders should not be entertained unless there has been a significant change in circumstances since the initial orders were made. The mother appealed against this decision, arguing that the trial judge failed to consider all the evidence and misapplied the weight of certain evidence. Additionally, the mother sought to introduce new evidence on appeal, which the father opposed. The father also sought costs for the appeal.

The primary legal issue was whether the trial judge correctly applied the Rice & Asplund principle in dismissing the mother's application to vary the parenting orders. Another issue was whether the trial judge erred in the weight he gave to the evidence presented. A further issue was whether the mother's application to introduce new evidence on appeal was permissible. Finally, the court needed to determine whether the father should be awarded costs of the appeal.

The court held that the trial judge did not fail to consider the full extent of the evidence and applications before him. The court also found that the trial judge did not err in the weight he afforded to the evidence. When applying the Rice & Asplund principle, the court concluded that it was unnecessary to address all the factors in s 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The court seriously doubted that a dismissal of an application to vary parenting orders was a parenting order under s 64B of the Act, as it did not fit within the definition of such orders. Therefore, the court found no merit in any ground of appeal. The court also dismissed the mother's application to introduce new evidence on appeal, as the evidence was not relevant to the issues before the trial judge. The court further ruled that the father was entitled to costs of the appeal, as it was wholly unsuccessful.

The court dismissed the mother's applications to adduce further evidence and to vary the parenting orders. The appeal was also dismissed. The court ordered the appellant mother to pay the respondent father's costs of the appeal, with costs to be assessed in default of agreement.