DJC & SJS

The appeal concerned an application by the father for an increase in existing interim contact with his daughter. The primary judge had refused this application, concluding that it would be inappropriate to conduct a new hearing on contact issues, consistent with previous reasons for judgment in the matter. The father also sought the dismissal of the Independent Child's Lawyer from the proceedings, which was also refused.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge had erred in refusing to grant an increase in interim contact and in refusing to dismiss the Independent Child's Lawyer.

The Full Court found no discernible error in the primary judge's approach. The reasoning applied was that the existing interim orders were made in accordance with previous judgments of the court, and it was not appropriate to revisit those decisions at an interim stage. The refusal to dismiss the Independent Child's Lawyer was also upheld.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the father was ordered to pay the Independent Child's Lawyer's costs in the sum of $1606.