Fennessy and Gregorian (formerly Sanchez) - [2007] FamCA 1574

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FENNESSY & GREGORIAN (FMLY SANCHEZ)

[2007] FamCA 1574

FAMILY LAW - CHILD ABUSE - Finding of, Allegation, Sexual abuse
FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN - Child related proceedings - Evidence relating to child abuse or family violence
FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN - With whom a child lives - Best interests of child

U & U (2002) FLC 93-112
Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336
WK & SR (1997) 22 Fam LR 592
M & M (1998) FLC 91-979
K N & The Children’s Representative (2006) FLC 93-284
B & B (1993) FLC 92-357
Goode & Goode (2006) FLC 93-286
Bennett & Bennett (2001) FLC 93-088
Vlug & Poulos (1997) FLC 92-278
Zabaneh (1986) FLC 91-766
KS & DS (1999) FLC 92-860
Ross & McDermott (1998) 23 Fam LR 613

APPLICANT:

MR FENNESSY

RESPONDENT:

MRS GREGORIAN (formerly SANCHEZ

INTERVENOR:

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SAFETY (QLD)

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

WILLIAMS LAWYERS

FILE NUMBER:

BRF

5353

2003

DATE DELIVERED:	19 December 2007
PLACE DELIVERED:	Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF:

COLLIER J

HEARING DATE:

18 - 22 July 2005, 25 - 29 July 2005,
1 - 5 August 2005, 26 - 30 September 2005,
3 - 7 October 2005, 10 - 14 October 2005,
30 January - 3 February 2006,
29 May - 2 June 2006, 5 - 9 June 2006,
26 - 30 June 2006, 11 and 12 September 2006

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:

SELF REPRESENTED

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

MR CANNING

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

ANDERSONS SOLICITORS

COUNSEL FOR THE INTERVENOR:

MR FORREST

SOLICITOR FOR THE INTERVENOR:

CROWN LAW

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER COUNSEL:

MR LINKLATER-STEELE

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER SOLICITOR:

WILLIAMS LAWYERS

Orders........................................................................................................................................ v

Introduction
Brief Background

The Orders contended for by the Parties

The Father
The Mother
The Intervener
The Independent Children’s Lawyer

The Affidavit Material of the Parties

The Applicant Father
The Respondent Mother
The Intervener
The Independent Children’s Lawyer

Court Orders
The Father’s Case
The Mother’s Case
The Case of the Intervener
The Case of the Independent Children’s Lawyer
Alternative Orders
The Witnesses Who Gave Evidence before Me

Witnesses in the Mother’s Case
Witnesses in the Intervener’s Case
Witnesses in the case of the Independent Children’s Lawyer

The Evidence Before Me

The Father........................................................................................................................... 14
Ms C................................................................................................................................... 20
Ms B................................................................................................................................... 21
A Fennessy......................................................................................................................... 21
Dr Y..................................................................................................................................... 22
Mrs T.................................................................................................................................. 24
Detective G........................................................................................................................ 25
Ms K................................................................................................................................... 27
Mr Z.................................................................................................................................... 28
Mr U................................................................................................................................... 29
The Mother......................................................................................................................... 30
Mr Gregorian..................................................................................................................... 38
Sergeant L.......................................................................................................................... 41

Dr J .................................................................................................................................... 43
Dr S..................................................................................................................................... 44
Ms F.................................................................................................................................... 45
Detective R........................................................................................................................ 47
Mr X................................................................................................................................... 48
Professor N........................................................................................................................ 58
Ms D................................................................................................................................... 72
Ms M.................................................................................................................................. 72

Sequence of Events................................................................................................................ 73
Observation of the Parties and Mr Gregorian .................................................................... 75

The Father
The Mother
Mr Gregorian .................................................................................................................... 83

The Evidence Concerning the Sexual abuse of the Child................................................... 85
Can I determine the Perpetrator
The Issue of Unacceptable Risk
The Law to be Applied

Discussion
The Mother’s Application Against the Father to Restrain him from Further Proceedings and for Costs
The Intervener's Application for an Order…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Fennessy and Gregorian (formerly Sanchez)

Details

AGLC: Fennessy and Gregorian (formerly Sanchez) [2007] FamCA 1574
Case: [2007] FamCA 1574
Decision Date: 19 December 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Fennessy and Gregorian (formerly Sanchez)*, Collier J considered an application concerning parenting orders for a child born in December 1995. The proceedings involved the child's mother, Mrs Gregorian, and father, Mr Fennessy.

The court was required to determine the appropriate parenting arrangements for the child, including issues of parental responsibility, living arrangements, and the extent of the father's time with and communication with the child. The court also considered whether to grant leave for the father to institute future proceedings concerning parenting orders for the child.

Collier J discharged all previous parenting orders and made new orders granting the mother sole parental responsibility for the child. The child was ordered to live with the mother, and the father was prohibited from spending any time with or communicating with the child. Furthermore, the father was barred from instituting future proceedings regarding parenting orders concerning the child without the leave of a Judge. Leave was granted for parties to apply for costs within 28 days, and all other applications were dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

That all previous parenting orders in relation to the child L born in December 1995 be and are hereby discharged.

That the mother, MRS GREGORIAN, have sole parental responsibility for the subject child.

That the subject child live with the mother.

That the father, MR FENNESSY, spend no time with the subject child nor communicate with the subject child in any manner or fashion.

That the father shall not without the leave of a Judge of this Court, institute proceedings under the Family Law Act 1975 (as amended) in respect of any parenting orders concerning the subject child.

That leave is granted to any party within 28 days of the making of these orders to make an application for costs in respect of these proceedings.

That subject to order (6) above all applications and cross applications be and are hereby dismissed.

That all issues be removed from the pending cases list.

That all material produced on subpoena be returned not before 56 days from today.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.