Farina and Naima

In the matter of Farina and Naima, Hogan J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered an application to amend a previous consent order concerning the supervision of a child's time with her father. The dispute centred on the identity of the supervisor.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to amend the existing consent order to substitute a new supervisor for the child's time with her father. The court was also required to determine the procedural steps for any subsequent application for costs.

Hogan J amended the consent order of 6 December 2017, ordering that Ms S would hereafter supervise the child’s time with her father, in lieu of the persons and organisation previously named. The court also established a detailed process for any party seeking costs, including timelines for filing affidavits, written submissions, and replies, with such applications to be considered in Chambers. Furthermore, the court incorporated a Fact Sheet into the orders, pursuant to sections 65DA(2) and 62B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), outlining the obligations created by the orders, the consequences of contravention, and details of support services.