Delaney & Carberry

Case

[2008] FamCA 1113

22 December 2008


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Delaney & Carberry [2008] FamCA 1113 [2008] FamCA 1113 22 December 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of *Delaney & Carberry* concerned a dispute between a mother and father regarding their children and their property settlement. The children resided in Western Australia, while the father lived in the Australian Capital Territory. The father's time with the children had been supervised since 2005 due to serious allegations made against him, including voyeurism, indecent exposure, and possession of child pornography.

The court was required to determine whether the father posed a risk to his children and whether a meaningful relationship existed between them, given the circumstances. In relation to the property settlement, the court had to consider the initial contributions of both parties to their seven-year marriage, the characterisation of various costs incurred during the proceedings, and make adjustments based on contributions during the marriage and section 75(2) factors to achieve a just and equitable outcome.

The court ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children, with the children living with her. The father was granted limited, supervised time with the children twice a year, in Perth and Melbourne, with specific conditions regarding travel costs and supervision fees. The court also made detailed orders regarding communication between the father and children, including telephone calls and letters, and specified how property, including shares and proceeds from the sale of a house, was to be divided between the parties.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Negligence & Tort

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Damages

  • Duty of Care

  • Negligence

  • Remedies

  • Standing

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

3

Statutory Material Cited

2

Marvin and Whitney [2010] FamCA 887
M v M [1988] HCA 68
Briginshaw v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34