HOLLANDS & HOLLANDS - [2020] FamCA 397

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HOLLANDS & HOLLANDS

[2020] FamCA 397

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Application filed by mother seeking parenting orders – With whom a child lives – With whom a child communicates – Allegations of violence – Orders that child live with the mother – Orders that mother have sole parental responsibility for the child including changing the child’s surname

Family Law 1975(Cth) s 60B and s 60CC

J v C in [1969] 1 ALL E.R. 824
Donnell & Dovey [2010] Fam CAFC 16
Yamada & Cain [2013] FamCAFC 64

APPLICANT:

Ms Hollands

RESPONDENT:

Mr Hollands

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Kate Mooney SC

FILE NUMBER:

HBC

702

2019

DATE DELIVERED:

30 March 2020

PLACE DELIVERED:

Hobart

PLACE HEARD:

Hobart

JUDGMENT OF:

Benjamin J

HEARING DATE:

30 March 2020

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:

Mr Foster

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

Murdoch Clarke

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Mr Blissenden

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Blissenden Lawyers

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT

CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Mrs Mooney SC

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT

CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Kate Mooney SC

Orders

Ms Hollands (‘the mother’) have sole parental responsibility for the child X … 2008 (‘the child’).
The child live with the mother.
The mother have sole parental responsibly to change the child’s surname.
Pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B of the Family Law Act1975 (Cth), 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 Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.
All outstanding parenting applications are dismissed.

IT IS DIRECTED

A copy of the reasons for these orders be taken out and placed on the Court file.

IT IS CERTIFIED

Pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the Family Law Rules 2004 it was reasonable to engage senior counsel and counsel to attend.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Hollands & Hollands has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT HOBART

FILE NUMBER: HBC 702 of 2019

Ms Hollands

Applicant

And

Mr Hollands

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

These are proceedings in relation to the parenting application filed by Ms Hollands (‘the mother’) on 8 January 2020 and included an application for sole parental responsibility, residence and the power to change the child’s name in respect of X (‘the child’). In support of that application, the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading HOLLANDS & HOLLANDS

Details

AGLC: HOLLANDS & HOLLANDS [2020] FamCA 397
Case: [2020] FamCA 397
Decision Date: 30 March 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Hollands & Hollands*, Benjamin J of the Family Court of Australia made orders concerning the parental responsibility and living arrangements for a child. The dispute involved the mother, Ms Hollands, and the father, concerning the child's upbringing.

The court was required to determine issues of parental responsibility, including who should have sole parental responsibility for the child, where the child should live, and whether the mother should have sole parental responsibility to change the child's surname. The court also considered the implications of contravening any orders made and the provision of assistance to parties.

Benjamin J ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child and that the child live with the mother. Furthermore, the mother was granted sole parental responsibility to change the child's surname. The court also directed that particulars of the obligations, consequences of contravention, and available assistance be set out in an attached Fact Sheet, which was incorporated into the orders. All outstanding parenting applications were dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Ms Hollands (‘the mother’) have sole parental responsibility for the child X … 2008 (‘the child’).

The child live with the mother.

The mother have sole parental responsibly to change the child’s surname.

Pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), 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 Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

All outstanding parenting applications are dismissed.

IT IS DIRECTED

A copy of the reasons for these orders be taken out and placed on the Court file.

IT IS CERTIFIED

Pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the Family Law Rules 2004 it was reasonable to engage senior counsel and counsel to attend.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.