Elm and Dennison

Case

[2017] FCCA 2904

24 November 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Elm and Dennison [2017] FCCA 2904 [2017] FCCA 2904 24 November 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Elm and Dennison, heard before Judge Newbrun, the dispute concerned parenting orders for the child X. The mother sought sole parental responsibility and orders for X to live with her, while the father sought to establish a parenting arrangement that included time with X.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child X, specifically regarding the allocation of parental responsibility, the child's living arrangements, and the nature and extent of the father's time with X. Key issues included the level of supervision required for the father's time with X, the practical arrangements for changeovers, and the conditions to be imposed on the father to ensure X's welfare and safety. The court also considered the need for communication and information sharing between the parents regarding X's education and welfare, and prohibitions against denigration of either parent.

Judge Newbrun ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for X, and that X live with the mother. The father was granted specific, supervised time with X, with supervision to be provided by the paternal grandparents or another agreed-upon person. The orders detailed the arrangements for changeovers, telephone communication, and required the father to enrol in and complete an anger management course and continue engaging with his psychologist. The father was also restrained from consuming alcohol or illicit substances within 24 hours prior to and during his time with X. Both parties were ordered to keep each other informed of addresses and contact details, provide notice of relocation, and were subject to orders regarding the sharing of information about X's education and welfare, and prohibitions against denigration.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

2