Herbert and Herbert (No. 2)

The proceedings before Forrest J involved applications by the mother concerning her two male children. The mother sought to vary existing interim parenting orders to have the children returned to her care, with specified time with the father during weekends and school holidays. She also applied for the discharge of the Independent Children’s Lawyer and sought to restrain a psychologist, Ms R, from continuing family therapy with the father and the children, alleging a conflict of interest.

The court was required to determine whether the mother had provided sufficient evidence to justify varying the interim parenting orders, discharging the Independent Children’s Lawyer, or restraining the psychologist. The legal issues centred on the adequacy of the mother's evidence in supporting her applications and the proper discharge of duties by the Independent Children’s Lawyer.

Forrest J dismissed all of the mother's applications. The court found that the mother had not provided adequate evidence to support her claims for varying the parenting orders or for discharging the Independent Children’s Lawyer. Similarly, the evidence presented by the mother did not justify restraining Ms R from continuing family therapy. The court then made various orders regarding the upcoming trial, including the listing of the matter for a five-day trial, directions for the preparation and filing of an updated family report, and the attendance of various experts, including the psychologist and a single expert accountant, at the trial. Directions were also given regarding the filing of affidavits and case outline documents by both parties and the Independent Children’s Lawyer.