Dumas and Cline

[2010] FamCA 485

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DUMAS & CLINE [2010] FamCA 485

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Case management review – Whether the father’s time with the child should be increased – Consideration of recommendations from the family report – Supervised time with the father ordered every alternate fortnight – Two-day trial set down

APPLICANT: Ms Dumas

RESPONDENT: Mr Cline

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Ms Dooley, Solicitor

FILE NUMBER: BRC 4707 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 3 June 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Barry J

HEARING DATE: 3 June 2010

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Brazel of Counsel appearing for the Applicant Mother

SOLICITORS FOR THE APPLICANT: Egan Simpson, Solicitors

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Russ, Solicitor of MDR Lawyers appearing for the Respondent Father

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER Mr Dooley of Dooley Solicitors appearing as the Independent Children’s Lawyer

Orders

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The proceedings be listed for trial for two (2) days commencing at 10.00 am on 21 October 2010 at the Brisbane Registry of the Family Court.

2. The proceedings be adjourned for trial directions at 10.00 am on 14 July 2010 at the Brisbane Registry of the Family Court, with all parties given leave to appear by telephone.

3. The proceedings be adjourned for trial directions compliance check at 9.30 am on 27 August 2010 at the Brisbane Registry of the Family Court.

4. Order (1) of the Order of this Honourable Court dated 23 October 2009 be discharged.

IT IS ORDERED UNTIL FURTHER ORDER THAT:

1. The child, … born … January 2004, spend time with the Father with such time to be supervised by both or either paternal grandparents every alternate fortnight from 9.00 am until 5.00 pm each Saturday and Sunday (New South Wales time).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 62B and s 65DA(2), 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 to adjust to and comply with an order, are set out in the document entitled “Parenting orders – obligations, consequences and who can help”, a copy of which is annexed to these Orders.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Dumas and Cline is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRC 4707 of 2008

MS DUMAS

Applicant

And

MR CLINE

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The matter was previously before the court in October last year, at which time I made orders that the father spend time with his daughter for two hours a fortnight, that time to be supervised by either of his parents.  The matter was back before the court in February.

2. A family report was prepared in October 2009.  At page 11 of that report, Ms B, the family consultant, made recommendations that the child’s time with her father continue under the supervision of her paternal grandparents, and that for the first six months, it be during the day, either Saturday or Sunday each alternate weekend, and it is also recommended that the child’s time with her father be reviewed at six months, with a view to increasing it to overnight each alternate weekend and half the school holidays, but still under the supervision of her paternal grandparents for a further six months.  It is recommended that the child communicate with her father by telephone twice a week.

3. The father has been seeing his daughter in accordance with those arrangements.  The mother complains that on one occasion, the father turned up outside, driving his mother in a vehicle.  He says that it was because his father was ill at that time.  The mother has made a complaint to the police about that.  On my calculations there have been about 12 fortnights in the period since the orders were made, and the father says the only adverse incident was a mix-up about the cessation of daylight saving, and they arrived an hour early and they were told to come back.

4. The father has, on today’s date, made submissions to increase his time.  He produces photos to show the child having seemingly an enjoyable time with himself and members of the extended family.  I am minded today to do two things.  One is to increase the father’s time with his daughter.  I propose to make it from 9.00 am until 5.00 pm each Saturday and each Sunday, once a fortnight, under the supervision of the paternal grandparents.  So I will not make it overnight at this time;  the mother would have too much difficulty handling that.  But it seems to me that the child, once a fortnight, can spend Saturday and Sunday with the father’s family, and it will give the father a better opportunity, one would have thought, to adduce evidence from parents and other witnesses as to the child’s demeanour and the child’s reactions in her father’s environment.

5. In a fortnight there are 336 hours.  The father sees his daughter for two hours under the current orders.  It is less than one per cent of the time.  Here, by making it 9.00 am until 5.00 pm on two days a fortnight, it at least significantly increases his opportunity to bond with his daughter.  The view that I take is that there have been no adverse reports.  I am not prepared to place any great weight on the contents of the mother’s affidavit.

6. The matter will be set down for trial on 21 October and 22 October.  I am going to review this matter on 14 July and make trial directions at that time, and at that time, the parties are given leave to appear by phone through their lawyers, but I would like the parties to be at their lawyers to give instructions.

7. I will make orders on 14 July telling the parties to file their affidavits, etcetera, giving leave to issue subpoenas, etcetera, and telling the parties to file a case outline setting out the orders they are seeking, who their witnesses are going to be, etcetera. My view is this case could not possibly take more than two days, having regard to the evidence, but the compliance check is on 27 August.  That is when I check that everything is in place for the matter to proceed to trial.  If there has been full compliance, again, I will give leave to appear by phone.  So I will decide that closer to the date and send a message via my associate.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Barry

Associate: 

Date:  3 June 2010