Feldon and Hall and Ors

[2010] FamCA 1083

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FELDON & HALL AND ORS [2010] FamCA 1083

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting orders – Undefended hearing – Orders made in terms of draft orders

APPLICANT: Mr Feldon

1st RESPONDENT: Ms Hall

2nd RESPONDENT: Ms Carmel

3rd RESPONDENT: Mr R Feldon

FILE NUMBER: WOC 58 of 2010

DATE DELIVERED: 16 November 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Barry J

HEARING DATE: 16 November 2011

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Woods, Solicitor of Hilton King Lawyers appearing for the Applicant Father

SOLICITOR FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT: No appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE 2ND RESPONDENT: The Second Respondent appearing in person

SOLICITOR FOR THE 3RD RESPONDENT: The Third Respondent appearing in person

Orders

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The matter proceed on an undefended basis.

IT IS ORDERED BY CONSENT OF ALL PARTIES EXCLUDING THE FIRST RESPONDENT MOTHER:

1. All previous parenting Orders be discharged.

2. The Father have sole parental responsibility for the children, T born … November 2000 and J born … February 2002.

3. The children live with their Father.

4. The First Respondent Ms Hall spend time with the children as agreed with the Father.

5. The Second Respondent Ms Carmel spend time with the children as agreed with the Father.

6. The Third Respondent Mr R Feldon spend time with the children as agreed with the Father.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 62B and s 65DA(2), the particulars of the obligations these Orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these Orders, and details of who can assist parties to adjust to and comply with an order, are set out in the document entitled “Parenting orders – obligations, consequences and who can help”, a copy of which is annexed to these Orders.

NOTATIONS:

A.The Aboriginal Home Care Services are assisting the Father in that they have established all care in home services for the child T.  The Father is currently receiving assistance from All Care In Home Services as follows:

i.Mondays between 7.30 am and 8.00 am;

ii.Tuesdays between 8.00 am and 8.30 am;

iii.Wednesdays between 7.30 am and 8.00 am;

iv.Thursdays between 8.00 am and 8.30 am and 3.15 pm and 5.15 pm; and

v.Fridays between 8.00 am and 8.30 am.

B.The Father has arranged through Aboriginal Home Care Services that each Wednesday for a period of two (2) hours a driver will attend at his home to take him shopping and to appointments.

C.The Father is currently receiving drug and alcohol counselling through the Drug and Alcohol Service Outpatient Withdrawal Unit.  The Father intends to continue with drug and alcohol counselling until such time as his drug and alcohol counsellor advises that he is no longer required to continue to attend.

D.T is currently seeing Ms K, an Out Reach Teacher.  Ms K attends at the child T’s school once a month.

E.The Father has arranged for his daughter J to attend SIBS a group for children with disabled siblings.  The Father proposes that J will attend SIBS once a month.

F.T is currently attending H Organisation for respite care each Saturday from 10.00 am to 3.00 pm.

G.It is the Father’s intention to continue to engage with the supports he has put in place to assist him with the care of the children.

H.The Father proposes that J be re-enrolled at W Primary School when she is returned to his care.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Feldon & Hall and Ors is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: WOC 58 of 2010

MR FELDON

Applicant

And

MS HALL 

First Respondent

MS CARMEL 

Second Respondent

MR R FELDON 

Third Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. I will have to deliver very brief reasons here.  I have received a helpful summary by the legal representative for the Independent Children’s Lawyer in this matter.  I have legal representation for the applicant father.  I have the benefit of the reasons/orders made by Registrar Campbell on 7 October this year.  It would seem that the first respondent mother of the children has not had any involvement in the children’s lives since 2006. 

2. In the circumstances, the arrangements put forward in the consent orders appeared – well, they are termed consent orders, but they are really consent orders so far as the parties other than the first respondent is concerned.  I think I’ll delete the word “consent” because, notionally, they are not really consent orders, are they. 

   RECORDED  :  NOT TRANSCRIBED

3. Not between all of the parties.  One of the parents is not available to give consent, has not taken part in these proceedings.  So I will make orders as an undefended hearing on today’s date in terms of the draft which has been produced, which is initialled by me and placed with the papers. 

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Barry delivered on 16 November 2010.

Associate: 

Date:  16 November 2010