FULLEN & JARVEY

[2019] FCCA 2142

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FULLEN & JARVEY [2019] FCCA 2142

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Parenting proceedings – proceedings transferred to the Family Court of Australia – order made.

Legislation:

Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999, s.39

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, r.8.02

Cases cited:

Morris & Rosetti [2017] FamCA 249

Applicant: MS FULLEN

Respondent: MR JARVEY

File Number: PAC 5692 of 2017

Judgment of: Judge Newbrun

Hearing date: 1 August 2019

Date of Last Submission: 1 August 2019

Delivered at: Parramatta

Delivered on: 7 August 2019

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Mr Brown

The Respondent appeared in person

Solicitors for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Ms Dodson

ORDERS

1. These proceedings are forthwith transferred to the Family Court of Australia at Parramatta, with the matter to be mentioned on   21 August      2019 at 9:30 am.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PARRAMATTA

PAC 5692 of 2017

MS FULLEN

Applicant

And

MR JARVEY

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. The within Reasons for Judgment relate to this Court’s Order of today that these parenting proceedings be transferred to the Family Court of Australia at Parramatta.

2. The subject child is [X] born … 2015.

3. The father, a former public servant (presently receiving workers compensation benefits) is aged 31 years, and the mother, herself a former public servant, is aged 30 years, and she is presently in employment.  The parties relationship commenced in about 2012.  They separated in about 2016.

4. In about late 2013 the father commenced proceedings in this Court and there were parenting Orders made on 3 February 2014.

5. The father is presently legally unrepresented. However he indicated to the Court that he will seek to have legal representation at any future final hearing through an application for legal representation pursuant to section 102NA of the Family Law Act 1975, by reason of likely cross examination of the mother in respect of family violence.

6. The child lives with the mother and spends supervised time with the father.

7. The father proposes to call at least 5 lay witnesses as well as his treating psychologist to give evidence.  The mother proposes to call 2 lay witnesses together with her treating psychologist.  The ICL will call the court-appointed expert, Dr A to give evidence.

8. Dr A is of the view that these parenting proceedings are very complex (paragraph 157 of her expert report) and that the critical issue, to her mind, is whether the child is at appreciable risk of harm in either household (although her Formulation indicates that her concerns are with the father).

9. Dr A stated (at paragraph 160 her expert report) that more definitive information is required about the father’s drug use and his psychiatric diagnosis before a clear pathway forward for the child and parenting can be identified.  She states that an update report would be required before unsupervised time between the…