Chranley & Smart (No. 12)

The father applied to the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia, represented by Strickland J, alleging the mother had filed a false affidavit. The father also sought further time with the child, an adjournment of existing orders pending an appeal, and other procedural relief. The mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer were respondents to various applications.

The court was required to determine whether the father’s application for contempt was properly before the court, given it was in the same terms as two previously dismissed applications. It also needed to consider the father's application for increased time with the child, in light of a Family Assessment Report, and his application to set aside orders made by consent pending an appeal.

Strickland J dismissed the contempt application, finding it frivolous and vexatious as nothing new had been raised since previous dismissals. Regarding the father's application for increased time with the child, the court found no support for an interim change to current arrangements, particularly in light of the Family Assessment Report, and dismissed this application. The father's application to set aside consent orders pending appeal was also dismissed, as there was no basis to grant leave to file such an application, especially as the father himself had consented to an order under s 118 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court adjourned the Independent Children’s Lawyer's application for orders pursuant to s 118 or r 11.04 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth).