Dalbeck and Dalbeck

[2020] FCCA 1117

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DALBECK & DALBECK [2020] FCCA 1117

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Parenting proceedings – proceedings transferred to the Family Court of Australia – order made.

Legislation:

Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), s.39

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.8.02

Cases cited:

Morris & Rosetti [2017] FamCA 249

Applicant: MR DALBECK

Respondent: MS DALBECK

File Number: PAC 2349 of 2016

Judgment of: Judge Newbrun

Hearing dates: 4 May 2020

Date of Last Submission: 4 May 2020

Delivered at: Parramatta

Orders Pronounced: 4 May 2020

Delivered on: 11 May 2020

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr Jackson
Solicitors for the Applicant:	Sharah & Associates Solicitors & Conveyancers
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr Schroder
Solicitors for the Respondent	Benetatos White

Counsel for the Independent Children’s Lawyer:	Mr Ladopoulos
Solicitors for the Independent Children’s Lawyer	Sydney West Family Lawyers

ORDERS

1. These proceedings are forthwith transferred to the Family Court of Australia at Parramatta, with the matter to be mentioned on 11 May 2020 at 9:00 am.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PARRAMATTA

PAC 2349 of 2016

MR DALBECK

Applicant

And

MS DALBECK

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. The within Reasons for Judgment relate to this Court’s Order of 4 May 2020 that these parenting proceedings be transferred to the Family Court of Australia at Parramatta.

2. The subject child is X 7 July 2014.

3. The mother, on 23 April 2020, filed an amended Response seeking final parenting orders, inter alia, that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child; the child live with the mother; the child spend no time with the father; the mother have sole responsibility to obtain a passport for the child; and the mother be permitted to relocate with the child to the United States of America.

4. The father opposes the mother’s proposed relocation with the child to the USA.

5. The Court observes that the family report in this case dated 28 November 2017 does not deal with the mother’s proposed relocation with the child to the USA.

6. The court observes that the mother presently contends that a chapter 15 expert report should be obtained in relation to the mental health of both parties

Issues in dispute

1. The issues in dispute include the following:

   a)The mother’s proposed relocation with the child to the United States of America.

   b)The nature and extent of each parent’s relationship with each child;

   c)The nature and extent of alleged family violence perpetrated by the father towards the mother, and the relevance of same for his parenting capacity;

   d)The parenting capacity of each party;

   e)The mental health of the father and mother;

   f)Whether the father’s partner abuses alcohol;

   g)The nature and extent of the child’s time with the father;

   h)Whether the parties should have equal shared parental responsibility or whether sole parental responsibility should be assigned to one parent.

Relevant statutory…