DONALDSON & RYDER - [2019] FamCA 311

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DONALDSON & RYDER

[2019] FamCA 311

FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Contravention – Where there are six counts of alleged contravention of final parenting orders – Where no reasonable excuse for contravention established – Where contraventions are less serious – Where orders made requiring the respondent to enter into a good behaviour bond for a period of three months.

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the respondent shall contribute to the costs of the applicant fixed in the sum of $2,000 payable within 90 days.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Acland & Grohl [2019] FamCAFC 69

Gravis & Major [2010] FamCAFC 239

Lenova & Lenova (Costs) [2011] FamCAFC 141

APPLICANT:

Mr Donaldson

RESPONDENT:

Ms Ryder

FILE NUMBER:

BRC

3460

2015

DATE DELIVERED:

16 May 2019

PLACE DELIVERED:

Brisbane

PLACE HEARD:

Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF:

Carew J

HEARING DATE:

10 May 2019

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

Mr Harris, Keyworth Harris & Lowe Family Lawyers

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Self-represented

Order

The court having made the following findings

That the respondent contravened the order made 14 November 2017 (amended 21 May 2018) (“the primary order”) without reasonable excuse:

Count one

By failing to attend R Contact Centre at S Street, Suburb T, in the State of Queensland at 6.00 pm on 30 January 2019.

Count two

By failing to attend R Contact Centre at S Street, Suburb T, in the State of Queensland at 6.00 pm on 6 February 2019.

Count three

By failing to attend R Contact Centre at S Street, Suburb T, in the State of Queensland at 6.00 pm on 13 February 2019.

Count four

By failing to attend R Contact Centre at S Street, Suburb T, in the State of Queensland at 6.00 pm on 20 February 2019.

Count five

By failing to attend R Contact Centre at S Street, Suburb T, in the State of Queensland at 6.00 pm on 27 February 2019.

Count six

By failing to attend R Contact Centre at S Street, Suburb T, in the State of Queensland at 6.00 pm on 6 March 2019.

It is ordered

For the contravention of the primary order particularised as count one, the respondent mother, Ms Ryder shall, within seven days, enter into a bond upon the following conditions:
(a)       The mother must be of good behaviour for the duration of the bond including complying with the primary order;
(b)       The bond shall be for a period of three months commencing on the date the mother enters into the bond;
(c)       This bond is without surety and without security.
For the contravention of the primary order particularised as count two, the respondent mother, Ms Ryder shall, within seven days, enter into a bond upon the following conditions:
(a) The mother must be of good behaviour for the duration of the bond including complying with the primary order;
(b) The bond shall be for a period of three months commencing on the date the mother enters into the bond;
(c)…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading DONALDSON & RYDER

Details

AGLC: DONALDSON & RYDER [2019] FamCA 311
Case: [2019] FamCA 311
Decision Date: 16 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Donaldson & Ryder*, the Family Court of Australia considered allegations of contravention of final parenting orders. The respondent faced six counts of alleged contravention, with the court finding that no reasonable excuse for these contraventions had been established. However, the court also determined that the contraventions were of a less serious nature.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the respondent had contravened the final parenting orders and, if so, what orders should be made in response. A secondary issue concerned the appropriate orders for costs.

Carew J reasoned that while contraventions had occurred, their less serious nature warranted a response other than a more severe penalty. Consequently, the court ordered the respondent to enter into a good behaviour bond for a period of three months. In relation to costs, the respondent was ordered to contribute $2,000 towards the applicant's costs, payable within 90 days.

Orders