FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| DRIVER & DOLMAN | [2017] FamCA 91 |
| FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Where maternal grandmother have sole parental responsibility – where children live with maternal grandmother – where maternal grandmother seeks no time spent with the father or paternal grandmother – Where paternal grandmother discontinued her Response – where the trial proceeded as an undefended hearing – where the father is convicted of murder of the mother – where presumption of section 61DA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) does not apply given the father’s murder of the mother – where re-introducing the children to the paternal grandmother would be emotionally distressing FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Aboriginal culture – Indigenous child-rearing practices – where the children’s aboriginality is derived from their paternal grandfather – where children’s opportunity to experience their aboriginal culture is minimised as a consequence of the mother’s murder, father’s incarceration and estrangement from paternal family |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60B, 60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 61F, 65DAA(1), 65DAC |
| Donnell & Dovey [2010] FamCAFC 15 Mauldera & Orbel (2014) FLC 93-602 Re CP (1997) 21 FamLR 486 S v Australian Crime Commission (2005) 144 FCR 431 Wacando v The Commonwealth (1981) 148 CLR 1 |
| APPLICANT: | Ms Maddison |
| RESPONDENT: | Ms Dolman |
| INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Susan Gray |
| FILE NUMBER: | CSC | 657 | of | 2012 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 24 February 2017 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Cairns |
| PLACE HEARD: | Cairns |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Tree J |
| HEARING DATE: | 2 February 2017 |
REPRESENTATION
| THE APPLICANT: | In person |
| THE RESPONDENT: | No appearance |
| SOLICITORS FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER : | Susan Gray |
Orders
All previous parenting Orders in relation to the children B born … 2003 and C born … 2006 (“the children”) be forthwith discharged.
The children live with the maternal grandmother Ms Maddison (“the maternal grandmother”).
The maternal grandmother have sole parental responsibility for the children including but not limited to:-
a.Any medical or health matter concerning the said children;
b.Matters relating to the education of the said children, including but not limited to, the choice of school and curriculum;
c.Disciplinary matters;
d.Matters concerning the social development and sporting activities of the said children;
e.The names of the said children;
f.Matters concerning the religion, faith or culture and custom of the children;
g.The place of residence of the children including any change thereof;
h.Any matter regarding the said children in respect of which a parent should be informed or consulted with having regards to the provision of part VII of the Family Law Act 1975.
The maternal grandmother is permitted to make application for passports for the children issue without the requirement of having the signature of their father Mr Dolman.
The Independent Children’s Lawyer be discharged with the thanks of the court.
Otherwise all extant applications are dismissed and the matter is removed from the list of active pending cases.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment…
Continue reading DRIVER & DOLMAN
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- DRIVER & DOLMAN [2017] FamCA 91
- Case
- [2017] FamCA 91
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in circumstances where the presumption under section 61DA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) did not apply due to the father's conviction. The court also considered the children's Aboriginality, derived from their paternal grandfather, and the impact of the mother's murder, the father's incarceration, and estrangement from the paternal family on their opportunity to experience their culture. The maternal grandmother argued that re-introducing the children to the paternal grandmother would be emotionally distressing.
Tree J reasoned that the father's conviction for murder meant the presumption of equal parental responsibility did not apply. The court found that the children's best interests were served by the maternal grandmother having sole parental responsibility, given the traumatic circumstances and the potential for emotional distress if re-introduced to the paternal grandmother. The court acknowledged the children's Aboriginal heritage but noted that their opportunity to experience it was already significantly minimised due to the father's actions and absence.
The court ordered the discharge of all previous parenting orders. The children were to live with the maternal grandmother, who was granted sole parental responsibility for all aspects of their upbringing, including medical, educational, disciplinary, social, and cultural matters, as well as their place of residence. The maternal grandmother was permitted to apply for passports for the children without the father's signature. The Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged, and all other extant applications were dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
All previous parenting Orders in relation to the children B born … 2003 and C born … 2006 (“the children”) be forthwith discharged.
2.
The children live with the maternal grandmother Ms Maddison (“the maternal grandmother”).
3.
The maternal grandmother have sole parental responsibility for the children including but not limited to:-
a. Any medical or health matter concerning the said children;
b. Matters relating to the education of the said children, including but not limited to, the choice of school and curriculum;
c. Disciplinary matters;
d. Matters concerning the social development and sporting activities of the said children;
e. The names of the said children;
f. Matters concerning the religion, faith or culture and custom of the children;
g. The place of residence of the children including any change thereof;
h. Any matter regarding the said children in respect of which a parent should be informed or consulted with having regards to the provision of part VII of the Family Law Act 1975.
4.
The maternal grandmother is permitted to make application for passports for the children issue without the requirement of having the signature of their father Mr Dolman.
5.
The Independent Children’s Lawyer be discharged with the thanks of the court.
6.
Otherwise all extant applications are dismissed and the matter is removed from the list of active pending cases.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.