Elton and Batey-Elton (No. 2)

Case

[2009] FamCA 784

24 August 2009


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Elton and Batey-Elton (No. 2) [2009] FamCA 784 [2009] FamCA 784 24 August 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Elton and Batey-Elton (No. 2)*, Justice Cronin of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning the child S, born in May 1994. The proceedings involved an application by the husband for final parenting orders and a response from the wife seeking parenting orders, which the court ultimately dismissed.

The central legal issues before the court were whether to grant the husband leave to proceed with his application for final parenting orders in the wife's absence, the appropriate final parenting orders to be made, and the discharge of previous parenting orders. The court also had to consider the role of the Independent Children's Lawyer and the husband's application for costs.

Justice Cronin reasoned that the wife's response seeking parenting orders should be dismissed. The court granted the husband leave to proceed with his application for final parenting orders in the wife's absence. The court discharged all previous parenting orders and made new orders granting the husband sole parental responsibility for S, with S to live with the husband. The child was to spend time with and communicate with the wife on terms and at times initiated by the child. The wife was permitted to write to the child and send presents unless the child indicated otherwise. The husband was authorised to provide the child's school principal with a copy of the orders and to authorise the principal to provide the wife with normal parental reports and newsletters. The Independent Children's Lawyer was to be discharged after advising the child of the orders and forwarding them and the reasons for judgment to the wife. The husband's application relating to final parenting orders was otherwise dismissed, and all parenting issues were removed from the hearing list. Outstanding financial matters were adjourned for mention, and the husband's application for costs was adjourned to be determined in chambers, with specific timelines set for written submissions from both parties. The orders also included particulars of obligations, consequences of contravention, and assistance for compliance, pursuant to sections 65DA(2) and 62B of the relevant legislation.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Civil Procedure

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Remedies

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Jurisdiction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

3

Statutory Material Cited

1

Batey-Elton & Elton [2009] FamCAFC 101
Brown & Brown [2004] FamCA 1067
Fortnum & Fortnum (No. 3) [2008] FamCAFC 133