Grange and Grange

[2011] FamCA 887

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GRANGE & GRANGE [2011] FamCA 887

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Grange

RESPONDENT: Mr Grange

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Susan Gray

FILE NUMBER: CSC 787 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 17 November 2011

PLACE DELIVERED: Cairns

PLACE HEARD: Cairns

JUDGMENT OF: Watts J

HEARING DATE: 17 November 2011

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms Sinclair

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER : Susan Gray, solicitor

Orders

1. Order 10 of the Orders made on 5 October 2011 be suspended.

2. The father be granted liberty to apply on 14 days’ notice for a relisting of the matter for consideration of any orders he seeks in respect of the children spending time with him.

IT IS NOTED THAT:

1. The Independent Children's Lawyer wishes to retain the listing in February before Justice Benjamin to see whether or not the father has come back to Cairns.

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CAIRNS

FILE NUMBER: CSC 7887 of 2008

Ms Grange

Applicant

And

Mr Grange

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The mother has filed an Application in a Case on 25 October 2011 seeking that order 10 of the orders made on 5 October 2011 in the Federal Magistrates Court be suspended.  That order allows the father to have unsupervised time with the three children J, born in July 2001, L born in September 2002 and M, born in March 2006.. 

2. The front page of the Application in Case makes it clear that that application was listed in court today at 12 noon.  The father has not attended and it’s now 12.40 pm.  The court has attempted to contact the father on the telephone number the court has for the father but it has gone to message bank.  I am informed by the solicitor for the mother that she also has attempted to contact the father unsuccessfully.

3. I mark as Exhibit 2 a letter sent by the mother’s lawyer to the father enclosing by way of service a copy of the Application in a Case filed on 25 October 2011 together with the mother’s supporting affidavit filed on 25 October 2011. 

4. The mother has given evidence that on 29 October 2011 the father delivered to her letter box a letter with keys.  The letter, which the mother says is a document in the father’s handwriting, says:

   Greediness, here’s a key to Property T.  All the kids’ stuff and more is there.  Help yourselves.  Key belongs to Real Estate Agent W on P Street.

5. I am satisfied that the father was still at Property T shortly before Saturday 29 October, and would have received the application and affidavit that was forwarded to him on 25 October.    

6. The affidavit in support of the application sets out the mother’s observations of the father on Sunday, 16 October 2011 when she went to collect the children at the end of the time the children spent with their father on that day.  At around 5.00 pm, or shortly thereafter, she made observations of the father which would lead one to infer, and led the mother to infer, that the father was affected by drugs or some other intoxicating substance.  His speech was slurred; on occasions incoherent and when the mother removed the father’s sunglasses she gained the impression that he was “using and under the influence”. 

7. The father behaved in an erratic way and in apparent breach of the current AVO by following the mother and the children when they were trying to leave The Esplanade to go home. The mother had gone to The Esplanade to pick the children up when they were not at the designated changeover location at the appointed time.  In the circumstances it’s appropriate, at least until the father appears and makes a further application, to suspend the order that currently has the children spending unsupervised time with him. 

8. I note that the mother has made an application that the children spend supervised time with the father at the child contact centre until further order.  I am not going to make that order today because I am informed that there is currently a warrant out for the arrest of the father in relation to a serious driving offence that is of recent origin, and so far as the mother is concerned, the father’s whereabouts are currently unknown. 

9. I note the Independent Children's Lawyer has informed me that the interviews for the psychiatric assessments that were ordered on 5 October 2011, will not be taking place until March 2012.  It seems likely therefore that the order listing the matter before Benjamin J in February 2012 won’t be one that would be useful and may have to be at a time after the psychiatric reports are done.  I also note that it may be that the interviews for the family report and the psychiatric assessment of the father may not be able to be done if he is unable to be located.  Nonetheless, the Independent Children's Lawyer wishes to retain the listing in February 2012 before Benjamin J and I will leave that listing in place.

I certify that the preceding nine (9) paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore reasons for judgment dated 17 November 2011

Associate: 

Date:  21 November 2011