Doven and Doven

[2012] FamCA 184

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DOVEN & DOVEN [2012] FamCA 184

FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN – Interim Application – application by father to spend time with children at Easter – Orders made by consent - application by father to spend time with children for additional time –application dismissed

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Doven

RESPONDENT: Ms Doven

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Legal Aid Commission

FILE NUMBER: HBC 553 of 2009

DATE DELIVERED: 5 March 2012

PLACE DELIVERED: Hobart

PLACE HEARD: Hobart

JUDGMENT OF: Benjamin J

HEARING DATE: 5 March 2012

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr T Fitzgerald

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Fitzgerald & Browne

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr T. Bugg

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: M+K Dobson Mitchell

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT
CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mrs Kate Mooney

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT
CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Legal Aid Commission of Tasmania

Orders

1. Orders made 8 August 2011 be varied to provide that J Doven born

   
   

   … January 2006 (“J”) spend time with the father from:-

   (a)6.00pm Friday 6 April 2012 to 6.00pm on Easter Sunday, 8 April 2012; and

   (b)from 6.00pm Friday 13 April 2012 to 6.00pm Sunday 15 April 2012.

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.

3. The application in a case filed by the father on 2 March 2012 be dismissed.

4. Costs of all parties be reserved.

   IT IS DIRECTED

5. A copy of the reasons for these orders be taken out and placed on the court file.

   IT IS NOTED

6. The court has made no findings as to credit in relation to the parties.

   IT IS CERTIFIED

7. Pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the Family Law Rules 2004 it was reasonable to engage counsel to attend.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Doven & Doven has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Act.

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT HOBART

FILE NUMBER: HBC 553 of 2009

Mr Doven

Applicant

And

Ms Doven

Respondent

And

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. There is an application before me for interim orders in relation to the two children of the parties’ relationship, R and J.  I do not intend to reiterate what I have said on previous occasions but there must be two parts, to any interim application.  Firstly, urgency, and to be able to display a need for an urgent change or an urgent restoration of some sort of parenting arrangement.  The parties in these proceedings entered into consent interim orders on 8 August 2011 in anticipation of receiving a report from Dr A, who was going to assist the Court by way of being a single expert and also assist the parties in terms of working out where these proceedings are going to.

2. That report was made available and the matter is listed for hearing in the third week of May 2012 for five days.  There are initially two parts to the application.  One was for some additional time that the children spend with their father over the Easter period and arrangements have been made in that respect and I intend to make those interim orders.  The balance seems to relate to additional time of about three hours in respect of R and an additional night in respect of J.  In relation to R, the issue is of such a minor variation that it ought not, in my view, have needed an urgent application.

3. At this stage it can properly and effectively be addressed at the hearing upon the taking of full evidence and not in the convoluted way in which an interim hearing is to be determined under the Rules.  In terms of J, the period of time between now and the hearing is relatively short.  There are significant issues as to her health and issues of fact to be determined in respect of that matter.  The father and the child will be seeing each other between now and the hearing and I am not persuaded that there is any urgency and accordingly, I will be dismissing those parts of the application noting that those issues can be ventilated on the hearing.

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Benjamin delivered on 5 March 2012.

Associate:     

Date:              5 March 2012