Eckley and Hiegate
Case
•
[2011] FamCA 438
•2 June 2011
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Eckley and Hiegate [2011] FamCA 438
[2011] FamCA 438
2 June 2011
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Eckley and Hiegate, Rose J of the Supreme Court of New South Wales made orders concerning the parental responsibility and living arrangements for two children, B and C. The dispute involved the Minister for the NSW Department of Family & Community Services, the paternal grandmother Ms D Hiegate, and the mother Ms Eckley.
The court was required to determine the appropriate arrangements for the children's care, including who would have parental responsibility, where they would live, and the conditions attached to these arrangements. This involved considering the welfare of B and C and establishing a framework for their ongoing care and supervision by the Director-General.
Rose J ordered that the Minister have parental responsibility for B and C until 2 June 2013. B was to live with her paternal grandmother, Ms Hiegate, subject to specific conditions including five years of supervision by the Director-General, random home visits, and the grandmother accepting reasonable directions and referrals for B. C was to live with the mother, Ms Eckley, also subject to five years of supervision by the Director-General, with similar conditions including prohibitions on alcohol and illicit drug use while caring for C. The court also made provisions for the Director-General to consider removing the children from either caregiver's care if concerns arose regarding their safety or risk of psychological harm. Further orders addressed the eventual transfer of parental responsibility to the paternal grandmother and grandfather for B, and to the mother for C, after specific periods of compliance, and outlined provisions for the children to spend time with their father and paternal uncles under supervision. Liberty to apply to vary these orders was granted.
The court was required to determine the appropriate arrangements for the children's care, including who would have parental responsibility, where they would live, and the conditions attached to these arrangements. This involved considering the welfare of B and C and establishing a framework for their ongoing care and supervision by the Director-General.
Rose J ordered that the Minister have parental responsibility for B and C until 2 June 2013. B was to live with her paternal grandmother, Ms Hiegate, subject to specific conditions including five years of supervision by the Director-General, random home visits, and the grandmother accepting reasonable directions and referrals for B. C was to live with the mother, Ms Eckley, also subject to five years of supervision by the Director-General, with similar conditions including prohibitions on alcohol and illicit drug use while caring for C. The court also made provisions for the Director-General to consider removing the children from either caregiver's care if concerns arose regarding their safety or risk of psychological harm. Further orders addressed the eventual transfer of parental responsibility to the paternal grandmother and grandfather for B, and to the mother for C, after specific periods of compliance, and outlined provisions for the children to spend time with their father and paternal uncles under supervision. Liberty to apply to vary these orders was granted.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Eckley and Hiegate [2011] FamCA 438
Cases Citing This Decision
0