Fontana and Bouras
Case
•
[2016] FamCA 668
•16 August 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Fontana and Bouras [2016] FamCA 668
[2016] FamCA 668
16 August 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Fontana and Bouras, Carew J considered parenting orders concerning a child born in 2009. The dispute involved the living arrangements and time spent between the child and each parent, as well as the allocation of parental responsibility.
The court was required to determine the primary caregiver for the child, the extent of the father's time with the child, and the nature of parental responsibility. Additionally, the court had to consider provisions for communication between the parents regarding the child's welfare, education, and travel, as well as the father's ability to obtain school reports and the potential for contact with the child's half-brother.
Carew J ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The child was to live with the mother, who was granted sole parental responsibility. The father was to have supervised contact with the child on four occasions annually, with specific dates and durations outlined, facilitated by a designated service or a substitute service. The father was to bear all costs associated with these visits and was permitted to provide gifts and cards. The court also made detailed provisions regarding the mother's obligation to keep the father informed about the child's schooling, health, and international travel plans, and authorised the father to obtain school reports. The mother was restrained from changing the child's name.
The court was required to determine the primary caregiver for the child, the extent of the father's time with the child, and the nature of parental responsibility. Additionally, the court had to consider provisions for communication between the parents regarding the child's welfare, education, and travel, as well as the father's ability to obtain school reports and the potential for contact with the child's half-brother.
Carew J ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The child was to live with the mother, who was granted sole parental responsibility. The father was to have supervised contact with the child on four occasions annually, with specific dates and durations outlined, facilitated by a designated service or a substitute service. The father was to bear all costs associated with these visits and was permitted to provide gifts and cards. The court also made detailed provisions regarding the mother's obligation to keep the father informed about the child's schooling, health, and international travel plans, and authorised the father to obtain school reports. The mother was restrained from changing the child's name.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Injunction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Fontana and Bouras [2016] FamCA 668
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
2
Briginshaw v Briginshaw
[1938] HCA 34
Baghti & Baghti
[2015] FamCAFC 71
M v M
[1988] HCA 68