Dale and Tang-Li

[2011] FamCA 94

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DALE & TANG-LI [2011] FamCA 94

FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN - interim

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Dale

RESPONDENT: Mr Tang-Li

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mr Baker

FILE NUMBER: SYC 401 of 2009

DATE DELIVERED: 21 February 2011

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Watts J

HEARING DATE: 21 February 2011

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Costigan

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Litigant in Person

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Litigant in person

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Peter Baker Solicitors

Orders

1. By consent and until 2 May 2011, Orders be made in terms of the document entitled “Minute of Orders” and marked as Exhibit “1” as annexed hereto.

2. Pursuant to s.65DA(2) and s.62B, the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these orders and details of who can assist parties adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

IT IS NOTED THAT:

1. The Independent Children's Lawyer and the mother apply for the words “and/or audio” to be included in order 4 and the father opposes those words being included.  I find that it is appropriate that until 2 May 2011 those words be contained in the order.

Exhibit “1”

PENDING FURTHER ORDER:

1. That the matter be adjourned to the duty list at 10.00 am 2 May 2011.

1. That the supervisor Mr D provide both parties and the ICL with a report of his supervision by 18 April 2011, as follows:

a)on Saturday 15 January 2011;

b)on Saturday 22 January 2011;

c)on Saturday 29 January 2011;

d)on Saturday 5 February 2011;

e)on Saturday 12 February 2011;

f)on Saturday 19 February 2011.

1. That until 29 April 2011 the child, C born … September 2007, spend time with the father supervised by Mr R as follows:

   a)on Saturday 26th February 2011  10.00 am to 12 noon;

   b)on Saturday 5th March 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   c)on Saturday 12th March 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   d)on Saturday 19th March 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   e)on Saturday 26th March 2011. 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   f) on Saturday 2nd April 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   g)on Saturday 9th April 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   h)on Saturday 16th April 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   i)on Saturday 23rd April 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon;

   j)on Saturday 30th April 2011 10.00 am to 12 noon.

1. That the father and his agents (including the father’s mother and the father’s sister) be restrained from videotaping and/or audio recording the child during the spend time with.

1. That the cost of the supervision be met equally by both the parties.

1. That the spend time with shall occur at the public location P, or such other public place agreed between the Father and Mr R.

1. That the mother deliver and pick up C, to and from the location pursuant to order 6.

1. That the parties are at liberty to  agree on other and/or additional dates and I DIRECT  that the issue of the cost of supervision be determined in the final proceedings in this court.

It is noted that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Dale & Tang –Li is approved pursuant to s 121 (9) (g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 401 of 2009

Ms Dale

Applicant

And

Mr Tang-Li

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The father wants the words “and/or audio” out of order 4.  I had a conversation with him about why I would not normally encourage the audio recording of the time a parent spends with a child.

2. I understood that his position was that he believes he is at risk in relation to malicious allegations being made against him but I have taken into account that Mr R, whom I told is somebody recommended by JIRT and has some policing experience, is to be the supervisor of the events between now and 2 May 2011 and in my view, that is sufficient protection for the father.

I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Watts delivered on 21 February 2011.

Associate: 

Date:  21.2.2011