Dunstan and Raines (No 2)

[2015] FamCA 738

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DUNSTAN & RAINES (NO 2) [2015] FamCA 738

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Adjournment – Where father made application at the hearing – Where adjournment strongly opposed by mother – Adjournment refused

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Dunstan

RESPONDENT: Mr Raines

FILE NUMBER: HBC 401 of 2010

DATE DELIVERED: 14 August 2015

PLACE DELIVERED: Hobart

PLACE HEARD: Hobart

JUDGMENT OF: Benjamin J

HEARING DATE: 14 August 2015

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms C. White

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Fitzgerald & Browne

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Raines in Person

Orders

1. The respondent’s oral application for adjournment is dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Dunstan & Raines has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT HOBART

FILE NUMBER: HBC 401 of 2010

Ms Dunstan

Applicant

And

Mr Raines

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These are proceedings between Ms Dunstan (‘the mother’) and Mr Raines (‘the father’).  These proceedings relate to the parenting arrangements for J, who was born in 2008.  These proceedings were commenced in November 2014 and relate to a relocation, albeit it a temporary relocation, of the child’s primary residence from Australia to the United States so that the mother can resume her relationship with her husband, who is working over there part-time.  The matter, as I said, was listed for hearing in early May, and directions were made for filing of affidavits.  The mother has complied with those directions, and all of those have been placed on the Court file, which include having her husband return from the United States as an international witness to this hearing. 

2. The father, on the other hand, has not filed any further affidavits and says that he needs an adjournment because his solicitor withdrew at the last minute.  I have some sympathy for the father’s application.  However, given all of the circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to grant an adjournment at this time.  However, I will be giving him leave, firstly to give oral evidence so I can hear the whole of his story and that which is not contained in his affidavit, and I will give him another hour this morning so that he can get organised.  As such I intend to refuse the father’s application for adjournment.

I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Benjamin delivered on 14 August 2015.

Associate:     

Date:              14 August 2015