CRAIG & RODERICK
Case
•
[2015] FCCA 204
•5 February 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Craig and Roderick [2015] FCCA 204
[2015] FCCA 204
5 February 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In a decision by Judge Bender, the court considered parenting orders concerning children X and Y. The dispute involved the allocation of parental responsibility and the specific arrangements for the children's time with each parent, as well as various ancillary matters relating to their welfare and the communication between the parents.
The court was required to determine the extent of equal shared parental responsibility, the specific responsibilities of each parent regarding medical decisions, the living arrangements for the children, and the detailed schedule for the children's time with the father. Further issues included the method of handover between parents, restrictions on arranging appointments and activities, the communication of court orders to the children, and the dissemination of professional reports. The court also addressed the geographical limitations on the mother's ability to change the children's residence, restrictions on discussing court proceedings with the children, and the ongoing communication of personal details between the parents.
The court discharged previous parenting orders and established new arrangements. It ordered equal shared parental responsibility for X and Y, with the mother having sole responsibility for all medical decisions, subject to specific notification and consultation requirements for the father. The children were ordered to live with the mother, and a detailed schedule for the father's time with the children was set out, including specific days, times, and communication arrangements. The court also imposed various orders regarding handovers, the prohibition of scheduling conflicting appointments, the explanation of orders to the children, and the sharing of costs. Restrictions were placed on changing the children's residence and on the dissemination of professional reports, with specific liberties granted for medical practitioners and certain mental health practitioners to receive relevant documents. The parents were also restrained from discussing court evidence with the children and were ordered to keep each other informed of their contact details.
The court further ordered that the parents be restrained from abusing or denigrating each other or their families in the presence or hearing of the children. All future parenting applications were to be listed before Judge Bender. The appointment of the Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged, and the court certified that it was reasonable for the parties to employ an advocate. Finally, the court included particulars of obligations and consequences for contravention of the orders.
The court was required to determine the extent of equal shared parental responsibility, the specific responsibilities of each parent regarding medical decisions, the living arrangements for the children, and the detailed schedule for the children's time with the father. Further issues included the method of handover between parents, restrictions on arranging appointments and activities, the communication of court orders to the children, and the dissemination of professional reports. The court also addressed the geographical limitations on the mother's ability to change the children's residence, restrictions on discussing court proceedings with the children, and the ongoing communication of personal details between the parents.
The court discharged previous parenting orders and established new arrangements. It ordered equal shared parental responsibility for X and Y, with the mother having sole responsibility for all medical decisions, subject to specific notification and consultation requirements for the father. The children were ordered to live with the mother, and a detailed schedule for the father's time with the children was set out, including specific days, times, and communication arrangements. The court also imposed various orders regarding handovers, the prohibition of scheduling conflicting appointments, the explanation of orders to the children, and the sharing of costs. Restrictions were placed on changing the children's residence and on the dissemination of professional reports, with specific liberties granted for medical practitioners and certain mental health practitioners to receive relevant documents. The parents were also restrained from discussing court evidence with the children and were ordered to keep each other informed of their contact details.
The court further ordered that the parents be restrained from abusing or denigrating each other or their families in the presence or hearing of the children. All future parenting applications were to be listed before Judge Bender. The appointment of the Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged, and the court certified that it was reasonable for the parties to employ an advocate. Finally, the court included particulars of obligations and consequences for contravention of the orders.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Craig and Roderick [2015] FCCA 204
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
2
Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation
[1997] HCA 25
Taylor & Barker
[2007] FamCA 1246
AMS v AIF
[1999] HCA 26