Fennett and Hessing

[2009] FamCA 1201

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FENNETT & HESSING [2009] FamCA 1201

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting Orders – with whom a child shall live – with whom a child shall spend time – long term responsibility for child’s care, welfare and development

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Child Protection Act 1999 (Qld)

APPLICANTS: Mr and Mrs Fennett

RESPONDENT: Ms Hessing

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Ms Meehan

FILE NUMBER: TVC 379 of 2009

DATE DELIVERED: 16 November 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Townsville

PLACE HEARD: Townsville

JUDGMENT OF: Murphy J

HEARING DATE: 16 November 2009

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANTS: Mr Pohlmann of Purcell Taylor Lawyers

THE RESPONDENT: In person

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER Ms Meehan

Orders

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The child, R, born … February 2008 live with the Applicant Paternal Grandmother and the Father, and that the Paternal Grandmother and Father have long term responsibility for the child’s care, welfare and development.

2. The Mother spend time and communicate with the said child as agreed between the Paternal Grandmother and the Father.

3. All outstanding applications be removed from the Pending Cases List.

4. Pursuant to s.65DA(2) and S.62B, 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 adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT TOWNSVILLE

FILE NUMBER: TVC 379 of 2009

MR AND MRS FENNETT

Applicant Paternal Grandparents

And

MS HESSING

Respondent Mother

EX TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter I note that, in July 2008, the Department of Communities (Child Safety) obtained an order pursuant to what is referred to in section 69ZK of the Act as an order under a “child welfare law” pursuant to state legislation. 

2. The Department is charged with specific statutory responsibilities pursuant, principally, to the Child Protection Act (Qld). Those statutory responsibilities include carrying out assessments and investigations pertaining to the best interests of a child, R, the subject of proceedings in this court, who was born in February 2008 and is, of course, still very young.

3. Having completed those investigations and assessments, the Department placed the child into the care of the paternal grandmother where he has remained since.  The child’s father and his mother, the paternal grandmother, are at one in respect of the prospective care arrangements with respect to the child.

4. It seems clear on the evidence before me that the order made under state law on 30 July 2008 has lapsed.  An order of the type referred to, namely a Temporary Assessment Order, would, in the usual course of events, lapse after a period of 12 months, that is, in this case, in July 2009. 

5. The Department does not actively intervene in these proceedings and the child, R, has remained in the care of his paternal grandmother and the father has been assessed by the department as presenting no risk to the child. 

6. I note in that respect that, in September of this year, the father completed a “Getting Support” program run through the Queensland Department of Corrective Services. 

7. Within the circumstances just described, the mother has been afforded the opportunity to participate in a conciliation conference on a number of occasions and has declined to participate. 

8. She had a two-hour supervised visit with the child on 6 August 2009, and subsequent to that, I am informed from the bar table has evidenced her intention to not avail herself of further time. 

9. Furthermore, I am informed from the bar table that the mother faces a number of serious drug charges and, as some indication of their seriousness, I am informed that her partner, and I gather co-offender, is already serving a term of imprisonment with respect to drug offences committed by him.

10. Against that background, the paternal grandmother, the father, and the independent children’s lawyer join together in seeking orders by consent between them in terms of a minute signed by each of them. 

11. I will amend that minute so that it reads “by consent between the father, the paternal grandmother, and the independent children’s lawyer, it is ordered”, and then, in terms of paragraphs 1 and 2 of the minutes of consent, I will delete paragraph 3 of the minute and, in lieu, insert the usual orders removing the matter from the pending cases list.

I certify that the preceding eleven (11) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Murphy

Associate: 

Date:  8 December 2009