HENDERSON & KENT

[2016] FCCA 1324

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HENDERSON & KENT [2016] FCCA 1324

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Children – poor communication between the parties resulting in adverse consequences for the children – interim orders made for parties to attend counselling to improve their communication.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975, ss.60CC, 61C

Applicant: MR HENDERSON

Respondent: MS KENT

File Number: SYC 6949 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Boyle

Hearing dates: 26, 27, 28 April and 4 May 2016

Date of Last Submission: 4 May 2016

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 1 June 2016

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: In person

Counsel for the Respondents: Ms Carr

Solicitors for the Respondents: David H Cohen & Co

Solicitors for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Legal Aid NSW Sydney Central Family Law

ORDERS BY CONSENT ON A FINAL BASIS

1. All previous parenting orders in relation to X born (omitted) 2009 and Y born (omitted) 2010 be discharged.

2. That the children live with the mother.

ORDERS BY CONSENT AND PENDING FURTHER ORDER

1. That these proceedings otherwise be adjourned part heard before Judge Boyle to a date in or around February 2017.

2. That within 7 days, each parent is to contact Relationships Australia (“RA”) at (omitted) (tel: (omitted)) to arrange post-separation counselling to assist them:

   (a)To establish a basic framework for communication;

   (b)To better understand their children’s needs (particularly emotional needs);

   (c)To implement the parenting arrangements set out in these Orders, and

   (d)To manage parental conflict.

3. That in relation to Order 4:

   (a)Each parent is to attend any intake interview or assessment as requested by RA.

   (b)Each parent is to provide RA with a sealed copy of these orders and a copy of the Family Report dated 23 March 2016 and has leave to do so.

   (c)Each parent is to attend counselling sessions as requested by RA.

   (d)Each parent is to do all acts and things necessary to ensure that the children attend RA, if requested by RA.

   (e)The father is to use his best endeavours to ensure that his wife, Ms S, attends counselling sessions if requested by RA.

   (f)Each parent is to comply with all reasonable recommendations made by RA, including accepting any referrals for personal counselling or for other forms of support, intervention or parenting education.

   (g)Each parenting is to bear their own costs (if any) in relation to such counselling.

4. That pending further order, the children spend time with their father as follows:

   (a)For a period of 3 months from the date of these Orders:

   (i)On each Saturday from 9.30 am until 4.30 pm

   (ii)From 9.30 am until 4.30 pm on two additional days during each week of the June/July school holiday periods as agreed between the parents but failing agreement on Mondays and Thursdays

   (iii)From 9.30 until 4.30 pm on (omitted) (Thursday 7 July 2016).

   (b)Thereafter, for a period of 3 months, in a 4 week cycle as follows:

   (i)Week 1: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Saturday.

   (ii)Week 2: From 9.30 am until 4.30 pm on Saturday.

   (iii)Week 3: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Saturday.

   (iv)Week 4: No time with the father.

   (c)Thereafter and until further order, in a 4 week cycle as follows:

   (i)Week 1: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Sunday.

   (ii)Week 2: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Saturday.

   (iii)Week 3: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Sunday.

   (iv)Week 4: No time with the father.

5. That the father do all acts and things necessary to ensure that the children telephone their mother on each night that they are in his care between the hours of 5 pm and 6 pm.

6. That prior to the commencement of overnight time with the children, the father is to ensure that he has a bed for each child at his home.

7. That within 7 days the mother is to do all acts and things necessary to ensure that the father’s name and contact details are included in the children’s school records.

8. That both parents are at liberty to obtain from the children’s school information in relation to their schooling, including a copy of their school reports, general school newsletters, information regarding school functions and events, and school photograph order forms.

9. That both parents are at liberty to arrange separate parent-teacher interviews with the children’s school.

10. That, subject to the approval of the Principal of the children’s current school, the father be permitted to enrol the children in (religion omitted) classes in Terms 3 and 4 of 2016.

11. That each parent has leave to provide a sealed copy of these Orders to the children’s school.

12. That each parent notify the other as soon as practicable in the event that either of the children suffers a major illness or accident, or is hospitalised, whilst in that parent’s care.

13. That each parent provide the other forthwith with their current telephone contact number(s) and ensure that the other parent is advised as soon as practicable of any changes, and that other than for the purposes of compliance with order 7 and 14 herein, the parties each be restrained from telephoning the other.

14. That each parent be and hereby is restrained from making critical or derogatory remarks about the other parent, or any member of the other parent’s family, to or in the presence or hearing of either of the children.

15. That each parent be and hereby is retrained from using physical discipline on either of the children.

16. That each parent is restrained from allowing any person to be referred to as ‘mummy’ or ‘mum’ or ‘daddy’ or ‘dad’, apart from their mother or father.

17. That each parent, their servants and agents shall be and hereby are restrained from removing, causing or allowing the removal of either of the children, X, born (omitted) 2009 or Y, born (omitted) 2010, from the Commonwealth of Australia.

18. That the Australian Federal Police be requested to maintain the names of the children on the Family Law Watch List maintained at all points of arrival and departure in the Commonwealth of Australia until further order of the Court.

ORDERS PENDING FURTHER ORDER

1. In relation to changeover:

   (a)For the purposes of time in accordance with Order 6(a), all changeovers will occur at (omitted) Contact Service and the father will bear the cost.

   (b)For the purposes of time in accordance with Order 6(b), the father will collect the children at the conclusion of school on Fridays in Weeks 1 and 3 of the cycle and otherwise all changeovers will take place at (omitted) Contact Service and the father will bear the cost.

   (c)For the purposes of time in accordance with Order 6(c), unless otherwise agreed in writing between the parents, the father will collect the children at the conclusion of school on Friday and return them to the mother at the conclusion of the time outside McDonalds on (omitted).

2. The father is restrained from enrolling the children in any (religion omitted) education outside the children’s school.

3. The matter is listed for mention on 2 February 2017 at 9:30am.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 6949 of 2014

MR HENDERSON

Applicant

And

MS KENT

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These are parenting proceedings concerning the children X born (omitted) 2009 and Y born (omitted) 2010.

2. The father is 40 years old and the mother is 33 years old. The parties met in (country omitted), where the mother was born. The father was born in (country omitted). The parties married on (omitted) 2007 in (country omitted), before moving to Australia in 2007.

3. The parties have two children X born (omitted) 2009, now aged 7 years and Y born (omitted) 2010, now aged 5 years.

The Parties’ Applications

1. At the beginning of the proceedings the father, who was unrepresented, indicated he sought orders as follows:

   a.   Equal shared parental responsibility;

   b.   The children to spend time with him from 5pm Friday to 5pm Sunday;

   c.   The mother deliver the children to his home at the beginning of his time and he return them to the mother at the end;

   d.   He spend time with the children on special occasions such as (religion omitted) and Father’s Day;

   e.   That he be able to participate in activities in the children’s school and attend at the school[1].

   [1] Father’s affidavit filed 11 April 2016.

2. The mother sought orders in accordance with a handwritten minute[2]:

   1.  That the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children.

   2.  That the children live with mother

   3.  That the children spend time with father:

   (i) each alternate Saturday from 9-5pm

   [2] Mother Exhibit 1.

   5.  That changeover take place at the (omitted) Contact Service.

   6.  That the father is restrained from denigrating the mother to the children or in the presence of the children and is to ensure no other person does so.

3. At the conclusion of the hearing, two orders were sought by the mother in addition to the orders prepared by the Independent Children’s Lawyer (“ICL”), to which the mother consented:

   7. That the father be restrained from allowing any person to be referred to as ‘mummy’ or ‘mum’ or such-like word, apart from their mother.

   8. That the father be restrained with telephoning the mother apart from compliance with orders 9 and 16 [in the ICL’s Minute of Orders].

4. A Minute of Orders was provided at the conclusion of the hearing by the ICL:

   1. All previous parenting orders in relation to X and Y be discharged.

   FINAL ORDERS

   2. That the father and mother have equal shared parental responsibility for children.

   3.  That children live with the mother.

   INTERIM ORDERS

   4. That these proceedings otherwise be adjourned part heard before Judge Boyle to a date in or around February 2017.

   5.  That within 7 days, each parent is to contact Relationships Australia (“RA”) at (omitted) (tel: (omitted)) to arrange post-separation counselling to assist them:

   5.1    To establish a basic framework for communication;

   5.2    To better understand their children’s needs (particularly emotional needs);

   5.3 To implement the parenting arrangements set out in these Orders, and

   5.4    To manage parental conflict.

   6.  That in relation to Order 5:

   6.1    Each parent is to attend any intake interview or assessment as requested by RA.

   6.2    Each parent is to provide RA with a sealed copy of these orders and a copy of the Family Report dated 23 March 2016, and has leave to do so.

   6.3    Each parent is to attend counselling sessions as requested by RA.

   6.4    Each parent is to do all acts and things necessary to ensure that the children attend RA, if requested by RA.

   6.5    The father is to use his best endeavours to ensure that his wife, Ms S, attends counselling sessions if requested by RA.

   6.6    Each parent is to comply with all reasonable recommendations made by RA, including accepting any referrals for personal counselling or for other forms of support, intervention or parenting education.

   6.7    Each parenting is to bear their own costs (if any) in relation to such counselling.

   7. That pending further order, the children spend time with their father as follows:

   7.1 For a period of 3 months from the date of these Orders:

   7.1.1 On each Saturday from 9.30 am until 4.30 pm

   7.1.2 From 9.30 am until 4.30 pm on two additional days during each week of the June/July school holiday periods as agreed between the parents but failing agreement on Mondays and Thursdays

   7.1.3 From 9.30 until 4.30 pm on (religion omitted) (Thursday 7 July 2016).

   7.2 Thereafter, for a period of 3 months, in a 4 week cycle as follows:

   -     Week 1: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Saturday.

   -     Week 2: From 9.30 am until 4.30 pm on Saturday.

   -     Week 3: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Saturday.

   -     Week 4: No time with the father.

   7.3 Thereafter and until further order, in a 4 week cycle as follows:

   -     Week 1: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Sunday.

   -     Week 2: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Saturday.

   -     Week 3: From after school on Friday until 4 pm on Sunday.

   -     Week 4: No time with the father.

   8.  In relation to changeover:

   8.1    For the purposes of time in accordance with Order 7.1, all changeovers will occur at (omitted) Contact Service and the father will bear the cost.

   8.2    For the purposes of time in accordance with Order 7.2, the father will collect the children at the conclusion of school on Fridays in Weeks 1 and 3 of the cycle, and otherwise all changeovers will take place at (omitted) Contact Service and the father will bear the cost.

   8.3    For the purposes of time in accordance with Order 7.3, unless otherwise agreed in writing between the parents, the father will collect the children at the conclusion of school on Friday and return them to the mother at the conclusion of the time outside McDonalds on (omitted).

   9.  That the father do all acts and things necessary to ensure that the children telephone their mother on each night that they are in his care between the hours of 5 pm and 6 pm.

   10. That prior to the commencement of overnight time with the children, the father is to ensure that he has a bed for each child at his home.

   11. That within 7 days the mother is to do all acts and things necessary to ensure that the father’s name and contact details are included in the children’s school records.

   12. That both parents are at liberty to obtain from the children’s school information in relation to their schooling, including a copy of their school reports, general school newsletters, information regarding school functions and events, and school photograph order forms.

   13. That both parents are at liberty to arrange separate parent-teacher interviews with the children’s school.

   14. That, subject to the approval of the Principal of the children’s current school, the father be permitted to enrol the children in (omitted) classes in Terms 3 and 4 of 2016.

   15. That each parent has leave to provide a sealed copy of these Orders to the children’s school.

   16. That each parent notify the other as soon as practicable in the event that either of the children suffers a major illness or accident, or is hospitalised, whilst in that parent’s care.

   17. That each parent provide the other forthwith with their current telephone contact number(s) and ensure that the other parent is advised as soon as practicable of any changes.

   18. That each parent be and hereby is restrained from making critical or derogatory remarks about the other parent, or any member of the other parent’s family, to or in the presence or hearing of either of the children.

   19. That each parent be and hereby is retrained from using physical discipline on either of the children.

   20. That each parent, their servants and agents shall be and hereby are restrained from removing, causing or allowing the removal of either of the children, X, born (omitted) 2009 or Y, born (omitted) 2010, from the Commonwealth of Australia.

   21. That the Australian Federal Police be requested to maintain the names of the children on the Family Law Watch List maintained at all points of arrival and departure in the Commonwealth of Australia until further order of the Court.

5. The ICL provided the minute of orders prior to the commencement of submissions. The father agreed with the orders sought by the ICL, save that he did not wish changeovers to continue at (omitted) Contact Service (“CWCS”) for a further 6 months, and he wished to be able to enrol the children in additional (omitted) education outside of school. The father and ICL both agreed to the two additional orders sought by the mother, for the father’s part seeking that both those orders be made on a mutual basis against both the parents. This was not opposed.

6. The mother consented to the orders sought by the ICL, save that she did not agree to the order for equal shared parental responsibility being made as a final order and proposed that there be no order for parental responsibility made on an interim basis, or an order for sole parental responsibility to the mother. Further, counsel for the mother indicated that if there were a cost involved in the father receiving information and school reports from the school, it should be at father’s expense.[3]

   [3] ICL’s Minute, order 12.

Documents relied on by the parties

1. For the father:

   a)Initiating application filed 4 November 2014.

   b)Father’s affidavits filed 4 November 2014, 26 March 2015, 11 April 2016 and a second affidavit filed 11 April 2016.

   c)Affidavit of Ms S filed 11 April 2016.

2. For the mother:

   a)Response filed 15 January 2015.

   b)Notice of Risk filed 21 January 2015.

   c)Mother’s affidavit filed 7 April 2016.

3. The following exhibits were tendered by the parties. For the ICL:

   a)ICL1. 2 letters from the contact centre dated 17 February 2016 and 20 April 2016.

   b)ICL2. Letter from the contact centre to the father dated 27 April 2016.

   c)ICL3. Emails from Dr F dated 27 October 2016 and 22 March 2016.

   d)ICL4. Father’s attendance record and letter from the contact centre.

   e)ICL5. File note from the Department of Families and Community Services (“FACS”) subpoenaed file, dated 13 July 2015.

   f)ICL6. The mother’s (religion omitted) conversion certificate.

   g)ICL7. File notes from (omitted).

   h)ICL 8. The children’s school reports.

   i)ICL9. Subpoenaed documents from NSW Police. 

4. For the mother:

   a)M1. Minute of orders sought.

   b)M2. Children’s school certificate.

   c)M3. Two letters from the Child Support Agency.

   d)M4. SMS message printout.

   e)M5. (omitted) Mastercard statement.

   f)M6. Mother’s additional minute of orders sought.

5. For the father:

   a)F1. The parties’ divorce file, number PAC4290/2012.

6. The family report prepared by Mr B was marked Court Exhibit 1.

7. There is no contest that there should be a final order that the children live with their mother. That is consistent with arrangements in place for the children throughout their lives.

8. It is an unusual circumstance that parties at the conclusion of a four day contested hearing join together in seeking that interim orders be made by the Court. The Court must have regard the best interests of the children as paramount, and be guided by section 60CC in determining the children’s best interests in interim and final proceedings.

9. The ICL submitted that interim orders are necessary in this matter because there is uncertainty around how the mother will manage the children spending overnight time with the father. Both parents are HIV positive and it is important for these children to develop a meaningful relationship with both their parents should either suffer problems with their health, which could be significant, in the future.

10. The impact of the children spending overnight time with the father on the mother’s capacity to parent was not particularly canvassed in the evidence. There was, for example, no psychological report dealing with the mother’s mental health, or ability to cope with such orders being made. The issue came into focus during the course of the mother giving evidence. Whilst being cross-examined by the ICL about the involvement of the father’s new wife in the care of the children, the mother became extremely upset and was unable to continue giving evidence, such that an early lunch break was taken to let her compose herself.

11. The father’s wife, Ms S, gave evidence prior to the mother. There was nothing in what Ms S said, or her demeanour, that suggested there was a concern about her providing care for the children. Her evidence was respectful of the mother’s role: “she’s the biological mother and [there is] no comparison between biological mother and father. I’m not equal to their real mother.” With respect to discipline she regarded the father as the one who should make decisions about it, and that neither she, nor the father, support physically disciplining the children.

1. The family consultant, Mr B, gave evidence. He was questioned about the mother’s highly distressed response during cross-examination. During the course of interviews for the report, the mother told him something of her early childhood experiences. Both her parents were killed in a car accident when she was around twelve months old and she was raised by her paternal uncle and aunt, along with their seven children. The mother “described her uncle as ‘very controlling’ and said she was ‘beaten’ by him and her cousins. She said that she experienced considerable trauma in her childhood and declined to elaborate on this.”[4] The evidence of the mother and the family consultant, suggests that the mother’s traumatic experiences in childhood remain an issue for her. There is no evidence that the mother has had any therapeutic assistance to address those matters. 

   [4] Family Report para 27.

2. The counselling proposed by the ICL accords with the evidence of the family consultant. The family consultant commented that it was important for the mother to have counselling from a “trauma informed practitioner”, and that Relationships Australia (“RA”) have suitably qualified counsellors. It is intended that the counselling would assist the parents in exploring their own emotional responses in regard to the parenting needs of their children, that is, to separate their own experience from their children’s experience.

3. Orders were made on 4 May 2016 to facilitate the parties in applying for counselling assistance through RA.

4. The orders provide for a structured, gradual increase in time arrangements between the children and their father. It is intended that the parties commence counselling, and start to build a framework of communication, prior to overnight time commencing. Both parents are required to comply with all reasonable recommendations made by RA for other forms of support, intervention or parenting education. The mother may well require some individual counselling to deal with issues stemming from her early years.

5. Section 60CC sets out the matters the Court must have regard to in determining what is in the children’s best interests. Given that the parties are in agreement with respect to the girls living with their mother on a final basis and interim time arrangements with their father, it is not necessary to consider all aspects of section 60CC in detail. The limited areas of dispute are dealt with below and pertinent section 60CC details are discussed.

6. The proposed orders provide the children with the benefit of having a meaningful relationship with each of their parents. The family consultant observed positive interactions between both children and each of their parents[5]. This is broadly supported by the observations of (omitted) Contact Centre[6].

   [5] Family Report par 52 and 53.

   [6] Family Report par 54 – 56; Exhibit ICL 4.

7. X is aged now 7 years and Y 5 years. They are not of an age or stage of development where their views carry weight with respect to parenting orders. Their discussions with the family consultant are helpful in considering the nature of their relationships with their parents. X commented that she liked seeing her father on Saturdays and would like to stay overnight with him. Y enjoyed seeing her father and was sad when she did not see him.[7] The consultant observed that “the children have positive and loving relationships with both of their parents.”[8]

   [7] Family Report par 47 and 51.

   [8] Family Report par 63.

8. The mother makes complaint of family violence against the father. There were interim proceedings taken by the Police for an AVO for the protections of the mother against the father at a time the father was out of the country, on 13 October 2014. A final order was not pursued by the mother, and there is no current order on foot.

9. During 2015 there were occasions when the father stood outside the Contact Centre prior to the mother arriving with the children so that he was able to observe their arrival. This was the subject of criticism of the father by Contact Centre staff as potentially intimidating of the mother and against the agreement of the father with the centre. He was given a verbal warning, then issued with a “Letter of Warning” by the Contact Centre on 1 October 2015.[9] There is no evidence of similar difficulties since the letter was issued.[10]

   [9] ICL Exhibit 4.

   [10] ICL Exhibit 1.

10. Whilst (omitted) Contact Centre is involved there remains a buffer for the children in not having their parents come together at times of changeover. The Contact Centre has provided a great deal of assistance to the parents and children, including facilitating the parents passing messages to each other important for the children, particularly regarding their health.

11. The girls have a (nationality omitted) and (nationality omitted) heritage through their parents. Their father is a practising (religion omitted) and their mother has attended a (omitted) Church in (omitted) and identifies as a (religion omitted).

12. In the context of this matter the interim orders consented to by the parties are in the best interests of the children. Without orders for counselling that support the parents communicating with each other, there is a risk that time arrangements will be unsuccessful for the children. The lack of communication at present has significant risk for misunderstandings to occur between the parents, creating difficulties for the children.

13. The clearest example of this is X returning from time with her father on 27 June 2015, complaining to her mother of pain in her genital area. The father did not raise any difficulties for X when returning the children to the contact centre staff. The mother did not speak to the father about X’s complaint, nor advise the contact centre staff until some time later. X’s report to the mother, JIRT and (omitted) Hospital was consistent with her being wiped too roughly by her father after going to the toilet during a visit. Had the parties been able to communicate X could have avoided an invasive medical examination and interview.

Areas of Dispute with respect to the proposed orders

Changeovers

1. The father did not want changeovers to continue at (omitted) Contact Service for a further 6 months because he has been meeting the cost of $40 each week for changeovers of the children’s care.

2. The parties are agreeing to embark on a course of counselling to enable them to communicate about the children. Once overnight time commences the children will come into the father’s care from school so there will be no cost involved with that changeover. It is extremely important for the children, especially at this early stage of progressing time, that there to be no opportunity for conflict or coercive or controlling behaviour between the parents at changeovers. The parties need the opportunity to develop skills which will assist their capacity to meet the children’s needs.

3. Reference is made above to the assistance that the Centre has provided to the parents and children. Those matters continue to be important to facilitate ongoing time arrangements for the children.

4. Changeovers shall occur as specified in the Minute of the ICL.

Restraint on the children being enrolled in (omitted) education by the father

1. The mother consented to orders that the children be enrolled in (omitted) classes at the (omitted) Public School for terms 3 and 4 in 2016. These classes are an alternate to the (omitted) classes the girls currently attend. She sought that the father be restrained from enrolling the children in (omitted) classes outside the school.

2. The father said that he would like to enrol the children in the (omitted) classes they attended prior to September 2014[11], in addition to classes at the School. He conceded that he had made no enquiries of what the (omitted) classes at the school entailed, and whether they were adequate to meet the children’s needs for (omitted) religious education.

   [11] Father’s affidavit filed 4 November 2014 Annexure ‘H’.

3. The mother gave evidence that she converted to the (religion omitted) faith in 2012, but that she did so because the father warned her there would be risks to her safety as a non-(religion omitted) should she travel to (country omitted) from members of the father’s family. She said he told her they would not accept her if she was not a (omitted). The mother says that she has always been a (religion omitted) and attended Church in (omitted) with the children in the past.

4. The interim proposal for the children to attend (omitted) classes at school gives the children the opportunity to learn about their father’s culture and religion in a manner supported by their mother. It is clearly in their best interests to have knowledge of the cultural and religious practices of both sides of their family[12]. They have to date had exposure to the (omitted) classes offered by the school.  If the father wishes to pursue having the children attend additional classes, the parties will have the opportunity to file evidence properly addressing the options for religious education of the children when the matter returns to court.  The order with respect to attending (omitted) class at their school gives the children the opportunity to participate in (omitted) education supported by both their parents.

   [12] Family Law Act 1975, s. 60CC (3)(g).

Parental Responsibility

1. It is common ground that at present there is no communication between the parties. The purpose of the orders being made on an interim basis is to give the parties the opportunity to develop with assistance effective communication between them. The parties do not make any decisions together with respect to the children at present as they do not communicate.

2. The mother has been able to pass messages for the father through the Contact Centre staff to take the girls to medical appointments and the father has sent back prescribed medication. The parties have had the ability to deal with the children’s health needs, other than in the specific example of X’s complaint with respect to toileting, set out above. The mother gave evidence she was confident that the father dealt appropriately by taking the children to the doctor and obtaining medication as required. She was of the view he would continue to do so.

3. I do not propose to apply the presumption that it is in the best interests of these children to make orders for equal shared parental responsibility at this interim stage. It is counterproductive for the parties, given that they are committing to engage in ongoing counselling to establish a framework for communication. They do not yet have the skills to do this. Both parties shall retain parental responsibility as referred to in section 61C, so that they are not required to exercise it jointly. They have been able to exercise this co-operatively with respect to the children’s general health to date.

4. The orders proposed make specific provision for each of the parents to be able to participate in the children’s education and health. This will resolve any problem of provision of information to each of the parents and alleviate concerns the father had about the school communicating with him.

5. The orders give the parents the opportunity to develop a way to communicate with each other, which is essential for the children. There is a clear and structured regime for gradually increasing time that should provide each of the parents with a greater degree of confidence in dealing with the other parent, whilst providing the mother with the security of a final order for the children to live with her.

I certify that the preceding forty-six (46) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Boyle

Date:  1 June 2016