Havre and Caumartin

[2008] FamCA 771

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HAVRE & CAUMARTIN [2008] FamCA 771

FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN – Parental responsibility – Application by co-mothers – Final parenting orders made.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Havre

RESPONDENT: Ms Caumartin

FILE NUMBER: MLC 7119 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 8 September 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Brown J

HEARING DATE: 8 September, 2008

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT AND THE RESPONDENT FORSTER & ASSOCIATES

Orders

1. That MS HAVRE and MS CAUMARTIN have equal shared parental responsibility for J born … March, 2008 and, pursuant to that responsibility, make all decisions relating to J’s long term and day to day care, welfare and development, including decisions relating to applications for a passport for him and his overseas travel.

2. That J live with MS HAVRE and MS CAUMARTIN.  

3. That all extant applications be otherwise dismissed.

4. That these applications be removed from the List of matters awaiting finalisation.

5. That pursuant to s.62B and s.65DA(2), of the Family Law Act1975, 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 document entitled “Family Law Courts Fact Sheet” a copy of which is annexed to these orders.

6. That the reasons for judgment this day be transcribed and copies made available to the parties. 

7. That the preparation of these orders be expedited forthwith.

8. That pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the Family Law Rules2004 this matter reasonably required the attendance of a solicitor appearing as counsel.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 7119 of 2008

MS HAVRE

Applicant

And

MS CAUMARTIN

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This application concerns the child, J, born in March 2008.  The applicant is Ms Havre, the respondent is Ms Caumartin.  They have been in a relationship for some eight years and have lived as domestic partners since 2001, in Melbourne.

2. Through the assistance of a mutual friend, Mr P, the applicant conceived and carried the child.  She is his biological mother; Mr P is his biological father.  Mr P was fully aware that the child would be brought up by his or her co-mothers; he was very supportive of that course.  Mr P has chosen not to have his name recorded on the birth certificate and does not seek any rights or responsibilities in respect of J, pursuant to the Family Law Act 1975, or otherwise.  Mr P maintains a friendship with the parties and so will have some involvement in J's life, from time to time.

3. Mr P has been served with all documents filed in the proceedings.

4. The evidence is that J has been accepted into the parties' extended families and social networks and they operate as and are acknowledged as a family unit.  J is thriving and is attached to both parties.  The court can find his physical and emotional needs will be met by his co-mothers.

5. A copy of J's birth certificate has been filed.  Ms Caumartin is named as the informant, the only way a co-mother can have her name recorded on J’s birth certificate.  It is to be hoped that may change in the future as a wider range of family constellations is acknowledged. 

6. This court can only make orders pursuant to the Family Law Act1975; it has no jurisdiction to make an order equivalent to adoption, or an order that goes beyond J’s eighteenth birthday.

7. I am satisfied on the evidence before me that the best interests of J require parenting orders to be made in the terms sought.  Ms Havre and Ms Caumartin will have equal shared parental responsibility for J, and thus responsibility for making all decisions relating to his day‑to‑day and long‑term care, welfare and development.  That includes any decisions as to overseas travel and the acquisition of a passport for J.  J will live with them.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Brown AM.

Associate: 

Date: