Chranley and Smart (No 8)

[2010] FamCA 905

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CHRANLEY & SMART (NO. 8) [2010] FamCA 905

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – where the matter has a long and complex history – best interests – orders requesting that the child attend confidential counselling with both parents – contravention applications adjourned pending the outcome of the counselling session

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Chranley

RESPONDENT: Ms Smart

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Graeme D. Hemsley

FILE NUMBER: ADC 207 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 29 September 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Adelaide

PLACE HEARD: Adelaide

JUDGMENT OF: Dawe J

HEARING DATE: 29 September 2010

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: N/A

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: IN PERSON

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: N/A

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: IN PERSON

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: N/A

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: GRAEME D HEMSLEY

Orders

1. The child S be requested to attend Confidential Counselling (and the adult daughter J if willing to attend) with a Family Consultant for a session with the father and that the Confidential Counselling also include the mother AND UPON NOTING that the parties and the Independent Children’s Lawyer request the counselling (which is Confidential Counselling) be undertaken by Dr A (if she is available) otherwise a qualified Family Consultant.

2. All Contravention Applications filed by the father are adjourned to 11 November 2010 at 9.15 am before the Honourable Justice Dawe for mention.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT ADELAIDE

FILE NUMBER: ADC 207 of 2008

MR CHRANLEY

Applicant

and

MS SMART

Respondent

EX-TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The contravention applications which are outstanding were adjourned on 11 August to this morning for mention.  On that day I also directed that the senior family consultant liaise with Dr A to arrange an appointment for the father to be interviewed about the prospect of a further Confidential Counselling taking place.  Dr A has undertaken that task and has prepared a helpful detailed family report dated 30 August 2010.

2. The report has been considered carefully.  Paragraphs in the report indicate to me that Dr A has a clear understanding of the variable factors which arise in this complex and longstanding matter in which the best interests of the child S have been the main factors to be considered.

3. It has to be borne in mind that S is aware that there have been proceedings outstanding for a considerable period of time.  S has been interviewed and the Court already has before it a report of the children and parents’ issue assessment of December 2009.  Bearing all that in mind, and in particular S’s age and previously expressed views, the possibility of renewing a relationship between the father and S was a matter that caused the Court to adjourn the matter, with the possibility of ascertaining any benefit to, in particular, S, of proceeding to Confidential Counselling.  That task was undertaken when the father indicated he may not proceed with the numerous contravention proceedings outstanding if such counselling was undertaken. 

4. At the hearing before me today, the father makes it clear that he is not proposing to withdraw the numerous contravention proceedings which are outstanding unless counselling goes ahead and, in his description, is “fruitful”.  I understand that to mean that he will be successful in renewing his relationship with S after the counselling.  The father is now indicating that if, at the Confidential Counselling, S indicates to him that she does not want to see him or renew her relationship he will then withdraw the contravention proceedings.

5. The Court is concerned to bring about an end to the proceedings between the parties as promptly as possible.  However, bearing in mind the specific recommendations of Dr A (and notwithstanding the difficulty the Court has in accepting that the father is able to focus on his relationship with his daughter rather than historic arguments about the Court process and his perception of the mother’s failing) it is the primary obligation of the Court to ensure that, where possible, S is given an opportunity to have a meaningful relationship with her father, taking into account that the other primary obligation is to ensure that S is protected both emotionally and psychologically from any harm, being the harm of an unsatisfactory relationship or the harm of ongoing litigation between her parents and other factors.

6. This is a difficult and complex matter but bearing in mind the possibility that Confidential Counselling may, in one way or another, bring about an end to proceedings in this Court, I am prepared to accept the recommendations of the family consultant, Dr A, and adjourn further consideration of the listing of the contravention proceedings until after such time as the parties and S, and indeed J, are given an opportunity to attend Confidential Counselling.

7. Bearing in mind the ages of S and her adult sister, J, it is not appropriate to make orders requiring them to attend Confidential Counselling but it is appropriate to make a direction that they be requested to attend and that such Confidential Counselling include a session when S, and if J is willing to attend, S and J attend with the counsellor in a session with the father and that the counselling also include the mother as recommended or requested by the counsellor.

8. It is noted that the parties and Independent Children’s Lawyer request the counselling, which is Confidential Counselling, to be undertaken by Dr A.  Bearing in mind the need to make the arrangements for that counselling to take place I would not anticipate that it is likely to be undertaken very quickly by Dr A, if she is available (otherwise a qualified Family Consultant).

I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Dawe delivered on 29 September 2010.

Associate: 

Date:  12 October 2010