Godfrey and Godfrey

[2007] FamCA 1045

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GODFREY & GODFREY [2007] FamCA 1045

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Estrangement between mother and children – Mental health issues – Mother does not pursue cases – all outstanding applications dismissed

APPLICANT: MRS GODFREY

RESPONDENT: MR GODFREY

FILE NUMBER: BRF 8197 of 2000

DATE DELIVERED: 21 August 2007

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: The Honourable Justice Jordan

HEARING DATE: 21 August 2007

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT: No appearance

THE RESPONDENT: No appearance

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mr Williams, Williams Lawyers

Orders

1. That the children, …, born … November 1990, …, born … February 1995, and …, born … November 1996, live with the Father.

1. That the Mother be at liberty to write to the said children directly.

1. That all outstanding applications before the Court be dismissed.

1. That the Independent Children’s Lawyer be discharged.

1. That pursuant to s65DA(2) and s62B, 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 DIRECTED

1. That should the Mother institute proceedings in the future, such proceedings should ordinarily be heard and determined in the Family Court of Australia.

IT IS NOTED IN CONNECTION WITH THESE ORDERS that the judgment of the Honourable Justice Jordan delivered this day will for all publication and reporting purposes be referred to as Godfrey & Godfrey

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRF8197 of 2000

MRS GODFREY

Applicant

And

MR GODFREY

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

EX TEMPORE

1. This matter has been before me for some time on several previous occasions in relation to the mother's on-going applications in relation to her children, the older son, born in November 1990, a daughter, born in February 1995, and the younger son, born on 19 November 1996.

2. The children have been under the primary care of their father since August 2001 and the mother has apparently struggled with personal mental health and substance abuse issues, and there is evidence before the Court which, in part, suggests that there is the prospect that the mother's thought processes were disturbed and/or delusional from time to time and that affected her judgment and the progress of her applications.

3. The mother has, from time to time, sought treatment and, from time to time, has exhibited positive progress in the management of her health and, at other times, has experienced relapses.  The children have, of course, been affected by all of these developments and the children have, from time to time, expressed strong views about their relationship with their mother, and the older son and the daughter, in particular, appeared very resistant to any on-going contact.  The older son is 16 and the daughter is 12.

4. The youngest child has been more ambivalent and retained some residual interest in pursuing time with his mother.  However, it was clear to the Independent Children's Lawyer and to the Court that the matter needed to be handled conservatively to ensure that any on-going contact was positive for the children, or the youngest child in particular. 

5. As I say, from time to time the mother, who appears more recently to better able focus upon the interests of the children, has acknowledged the difficulties of the circumstances and the need to proceed with caution, and on the last occasion the matter was before the Court on 28 June 2007, the mother indicated that she may need to take a step back from the process and contemplate the prospect that any time she spends with the children in the future should be at their choosing and, essentially, on 28 June the mother was considering her position, as I understand it, in terms of whether she would press the matter.

6. On 28 June 2006, having regard to those matters, I made an order which included a request that the mother provide to the Independent Children's Lawyer on or before 6 August 2006 her proposals in writing in relation to future relations with the children and/or any future applications before this Court.

7. The mother has failed or declined to provide such written proposals to the Independent Children's Lawyer and she has failed to appear today.  Those actions are entirely consistent with the mother's contemplated position on the last occasion, that she may largely withdraw from the litigation process and allow the matter to run its own course.

8. In the difficult circumstances of this case, it seems to me that, if that is a conscious decision by the mother, it is an entirely appropriate one and, in any event, there is a need, as I see it, in the absence of proper prosecution of the case and appearance of the mother, to bring this matter to an end for the sake of the children, and also having regard to the need for the Court to focus on the many difficult live cases it has and not continue to apply its limited resources to stagnant matters such as this. 

9. The case is, to the extent that there may be any on-going litigation, a very complicated one and I agree with the Independent Children's Lawyer that it falls into the category of complex cases which should ordinarily be heard and determined by this Court.

   ORDERS DELIVERED

I certify that the preceding nine (9) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Jordan

Associate: 

Date: