George & George (No 3)
[2023] FedCFamC1F 1118
•8 August 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
George & George (No 3) [2023] FedCFamC1F 1118
File number(s): BRC 4444 of 2020 Judgment of: HOWARD J Date of judgment: 8 August 2023 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where instructions were withdrawn. Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 3 Date of hearing: 8 August 2023 Place: Brisbane Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Balzamo Solicitor for the Applicant: Browns Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Mr GG Solicitor for the Respondent: HH Lawyers Counsel for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Ms Oakley Solicitor for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Legal Aid Queensland ORDERS
BRC 4444 of 2020 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MS GEORGE
Applicant
AND: MR GEORGE
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
HOWARD J
DATE OF ORDER:
8 AUGUST 2023
THE COURT ORDERS UNTIL FURTHER ORDER:
1.That Mr GG of counsel and HH Lawyers, including Mr JJ, are granted leave to withdraw.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym George & George has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
HOWARD J
A. These reasons were delivered ex tempore on 8 August 2023 and have been settled and corrected for grammatical errors and in order to convey the precise intention of the Court.
An unusual situation has arisen today, Tuesday, 8 August 2023, at about 11.30am in the morning. Once again, the father, Mr George, withdrew instructions from his lawyers – HH Lawyers. His counsel Mr GG then quite properly stood and asked the Court for leave to withdraw. Mr GG, quite properly, informed the Court that there were certain matters that he could not tell the Court in relation to his position that he finds himself in. I accept what he has told the Court in that regard.
Having heard from the other two barristers and weighed the matters for consideration - I came to the decision that the Court should grant leave to Mr GG and to Mr JJ from HH Lawyers to withdraw and I said as much. But then it seemed to become apparent to the father that he would not be able to cross-examine the maternal grandfather - although he must have known that previously because it has been explained on several occasions to him. It seems to me that it is now not possible for the father to then reinstruct HH Lawyers and Mr GG to stay and to cross‑examine anyone else. That horse has bolted. The gate has been shut. In my view, the leave to withdraw has been granted. I've been told there are particular reasons and I can’t be told anything further. As I say, I accept that. It can't then be the case that those lawyers would be permitted to continue in some limited capacity to cross-examine certain people.
Mr GG of counsel and HH Lawyers, including Mr JJ, are granted leave to withdraw.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Howard. Associate:
Dated: 8 August 2023
0
0
0