Hartman and Davies
Case
•
[2015] FCCA 14
•9 January 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Hartman and Davies [2015] FCCA 14
[2015] FCCA 14
9 January 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Hartman and Davies, heard by Judge Henderson, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for the child [X]. The orders made by the court addressed issues of parental responsibility, relocation, living arrangements, and time spent between the child and each parent.
The court was required to determine the extent of equal shared parental responsibility, whether the mother should be permitted to relocate with the child to Adelaide, South Australia, and the specific arrangements for the child's living situation and time with each parent. Further issues included the provision of educational and medical information between parents, communication protocols, travel notification, and the prohibition of derogatory comments about a parent in the child's presence. The court also considered the financial responsibilities for travel and schooling, and a potential variation to the living arrangements if the father were to reside in Adelaide.
Judge Henderson ordered that the mother and father have equal shared parental responsibility for [X]. The mother was permitted to relocate to Adelaide with [X], who would live with her. The orders then detailed a comprehensive schedule for [X] to spend time with his father, including specific weekend and school holiday arrangements, with provisions for agreement between the parties or default commencement dates. The court also mandated that both parents ensure they receive copies of [X]'s school reports and be kept informed of his medical and social activities. Communication between the parents was to be by telephone for urgent matters and email or text for day-to-day arrangements. Provisions were made for travel notification, and both parents were ordered to refrain from making derogatory comments about the other in [X]'s presence. The orders also addressed the sharing of costs for travel and school fees, and a conditional variation to the living arrangements if the father established a residence in Adelaide.
The court was required to determine the extent of equal shared parental responsibility, whether the mother should be permitted to relocate with the child to Adelaide, South Australia, and the specific arrangements for the child's living situation and time with each parent. Further issues included the provision of educational and medical information between parents, communication protocols, travel notification, and the prohibition of derogatory comments about a parent in the child's presence. The court also considered the financial responsibilities for travel and schooling, and a potential variation to the living arrangements if the father were to reside in Adelaide.
Judge Henderson ordered that the mother and father have equal shared parental responsibility for [X]. The mother was permitted to relocate to Adelaide with [X], who would live with her. The orders then detailed a comprehensive schedule for [X] to spend time with his father, including specific weekend and school holiday arrangements, with provisions for agreement between the parties or default commencement dates. The court also mandated that both parents ensure they receive copies of [X]'s school reports and be kept informed of his medical and social activities. Communication between the parents was to be by telephone for urgent matters and email or text for day-to-day arrangements. Provisions were made for travel notification, and both parents were ordered to refrain from making derogatory comments about the other in [X]'s presence. The orders also addressed the sharing of costs for travel and school fees, and a conditional variation to the living arrangements if the father established a residence in Adelaide.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Hartman and Davies [2015] FCCA 14
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
2
Hepburn & Noble
[2010] FamCAFC 111
Cales & Cales
[2010] FamCAFC 237
MRR v GR
[2010] HCA 4