Hanley and Aish and Anor

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HANLEY & AISH & ANOR [2015] FCCA 514

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Children – child’s best interests – child had no time with father since October 2013 – subpoena must serve a relevant forensic purpose – procedural fairness – meaningful relationship – family violence – child’s views – father’s lack of insight – sole parental responsibility – no order to spend time.

Legislation:  

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.60B, 60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAA, 69ZN

A & A and Ors [2005] FamCA 561
KB & TC  (2005) FLC 93-224
Godfrey & Sanders [2007] FamCA 102
Hall & Hall (1979) 5 Fam LR 609; FLC 90-713
McCall & Clark (2009) FLC 93-405

Runcorne & Raine [2008] FamCA 837

Sproat & Brimm [2013] FCCA 1823

Applicant: MS HANLEY

First Respondent: MR AISH

Second Respondent: MS PAINE

File Number: LNC 191 of 2011

Judgment of: Judge Roberts

Hearing dates: 11 & 12 February 2015

Date of Last Submission: 12 February 2015

Delivered at: Burnie

Delivered on: 30 March 2015

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant appeared in person

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J Petersen

Solicitors for the Respondent: McGrath & Co

The Second Respondent appeared in person

Counsel for the Independent Child’s Lawyer: Mr P McVeity

Solicitors for the Independent Child’s Lawyer: McVeity & Associates

ORDERS

1. That the Orders made by this Court on 30 April 2009 are discharged.

2. That MS HANLEY (“the mother”) have sole parental responsibility for [X] born [omitted] 2001 (“the child”).

3. That the child live with the mother.

4. That the child spend such time with MS PAINE (“the maternal grandmother”) as may be agreed between the mother and the maternal grandmother from time to time.

5. That there be no Order requiring the child to spend any time with MR AISH (“the father”) or to communicate with him.

6. That all extant applications are otherwise dismissed.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA

AT BURNIE

LNC 191 of 2011

MS HANLEY

Applicant

And

MR AISH

First Respondent

MS PAINE

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The dispute in this matter is about [X], who is 13 years old (“the child”).  The Applicant is her mother, MS HANLEY (“the mother”) and the First Respondent is her father, MR AISH (“the father”).  The child’s maternal grandmother, MS PAINE (“the grandmother”) is the Second Respondent but she was treated as a joint applicant during the hearing because she is seeking the same orders as the mother.

2. There have been earlier proceedings in relation to this child, which were resolved when orders were made with the consent of the grandmother, the father and the mother on 30 April 2009 (“the consent orders”).  In those earlier proceedings, the grandmother was the applicant and the mother and the father were respondents.  The consent orders of 30 April 2009 provided for the grandmother, the mother and the father to have…