Howe and Reedy

[2010] FamCA 386

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HOWE & REEDY [2010] FamCA 386

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting orders – Child’s time with father – Changeover – Otherwise consent orders made

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60B, 60CC-60CG
Family Law Rules 2004 Rules 1.12, 10.15A

G & C (2006) FamCA 994
Mazorski & Albright (2007) 37 Fam LR 518
McCall & Clark (2009) FamCAFC 92
MRR v GR [2010] HCA 4

APPLICANT: Mr Howe

RESPONDENT: Ms Reedy

FILE NUMBER: BRC 3659 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 10 March 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: O’Reilly J

HEARING DATE: 9 March 2010

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT: In person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Slade Jones

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Whitehead Payne

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mr George

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Barbara Fox Solicitors

Orders

IT IS ORDERED BY CONSENT

1. In the terms of the minute of orders Annexure A.

AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED

1. The original minute of orders signed by the parties be placed and kept on the Court file.

AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED

Child’s time with father

1. The child … born … November 2006 spend time with the father:

   (a)during 2010 on alternate weekends from 9.00am Saturday until 6.00pm  Sunday and on Wednesday overnight in each week from 4.00pm Wednesday until before kindergarten Thursday

   (b)during 2011 on alternate weekends from 3.00pm Friday until 6.00pm Sunday and on Wednesday overnight in each week from 4.00pm Wednesday until before pre-preparatory school Thursday

   (c)during 2012 on alternate weekends from after preparatory school Friday until before preparatory school Monday and on Wednesday overnight in each week from 4.00pm Wednesday until before preparatory school Thursday

   (d)commencing in 2013 on alternate weekends from after school Friday until before school Tuesday and on Wednesday overnight in each week from 4.00pm Wednesday until before school Thursday

   and otherwise as set out in the consent orders Annexure A.

2. The child’s alternate weekend time for the purpose of order 3 (c) and (d) be suspended during school holiday periods and recommence on the second weekend after the commencement of each new school term. 

Changeover

1. If the child’s time with the father is to commence or finish while the child is at kindergarten, pre-preparatory school, preparatory school or school he collect her from or return her to that place.

2. Otherwise all changeovers are to occur at the BP Service Station at A inside the premises at the point marked “X” on the colour photographs annexed to the father’s affidavit filed 10 March 2010 with the father to park in the area marked “applicant’s car park” on the sketch plan annexed to that affidavit and enter and leave by the door marked “A” on that sketch plan and the mother to park in the area marked “respondent’s car park” on that sketch plan and enter and leave by the door marked “B” on that sketch plan. 

3. The party with whom the child is spending time deliver the child to that venue for the child’s commencement of time with the other party and that party return the child to that venue at the conclusion of time. 

All other orders and undertakings discharged

1. All other orders and undertakings concerning the child are discharged.

All other applications dismissed

1. All other applications concerning the child are dismissed.

Independent children’s lawyer

1. The independent children’s lawyer not be discharged until 10 March 2011.

Liberty to apply

1. The parties and the independent children’s lawyer have liberty to apply by arrangement directly with the Associate if confusion should arise as to the intended operation of these orders or if any of them is ambiguous or unclear so as to require clarification.

Fact sheet

1. Pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B, 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 to adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached and these particulars are included in these orders.

NOTATION:

The mother acknowledges that the notice the father may give to her pursuant to paragraphs 2a and 2b of the consent orders Annexure A as to consecutive nights will be additional to and not instead of the alternate weekend time and the weekday overnight time and further that the consecutive nights may be joined on to either or both of the alternate weekend time and the weekday overnight time.

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

Annexure A

Preface:

IT IS NOTED THAT THE BASE UPON WHICH THE FOLLOWING ORDERS ARE AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES IS AN UNRESERVED ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BY THE MOTHER THAT ALL ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING TO THE FATHER SEXUALLY ABUSING THE CHILD […] BORN […] NOVEMBER 2006 (HEREAFTER “THE CHILD”) ARE WITHOUT FACTUAL BASIS SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH EITHER THE FACT OF SUCH ABUSE OR THAT THE CHILD IS AT RISK OF ABUSE IN THE FATHER’S CARE.

Parental responsibility and child’s living arrangements

1. That the child […] (D.O.B. […]/11/06) live primarily with the Mother and the parents have equal shared parental responsibility for the child.

2. That the child spend time with the Father at all times as may be agreed between the parties with such time to include the following:

   a.DURING 2010

   …

   iii.For three consecutive nights three times during the year  provided that the Father gives the Mother 42 days notice in writing of the days he nominates for these periods

   …

   b.DURING 2011

   …

   iii.For five consecutive nights four times during the year  provided that the Father gives the Mother 42 days notice in writing of the days he nominates for these periods

   …

   c.DURING 2012 (PREP YEAR)

   …

   iii.For one half of all school holiday vacation periods (except Christmas Vacation) – being the first half of such vacation periods in this year

   iv.For one half of the Christmas vacation period 2012/2013 but such time to be spent with each parent on a week about basis. The Father shall spend time, to start, with the child during the first week of this period

   …

   d.DURING 2013 AND THEREAFTER

   …

   iii.For one half of all school extended vacation periods being the first half on all odd numbered years ad the second half in all even numbered years

3. The Father shall use his best endeavours to ensure that he is physically present during all periods of the child spending with him.

4. Save in the case of emergency only the Mother and the Father shall be present and or involved in the collection or return of the child in those periods referred to in these Orders.

Special days

1. Notwithstanding any other order the child shall spend time with the Father for the duration of each Father’s Day weekend, to be the same amount of time as will obtain for the child’s alternate weekend time with the father for each of the years 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 and following, and if on Mother’s Day in any year the child ordinarily would be with the father the child’s time with the father that weekend not occur. 

2. The child spend time from 12 noon Christmas Day until 5.00pm Boxing Day with the party with whom the child has not spent Christmas morning. 

3. In the event that the child is not otherwise spending time with the father on the child’s birthday she spend time with him on that day between 2.00pm and 6.00pm until the commencement of 2013 and subsequently from after school until 7.00pm and if not a school day 2.00pm until 7.00pm. 

4. In the event that the child is not otherwise spending time with the mother on the child’s birthday she spend time with her on that day between 2.00pm and 6.00pm until the commencement of 2013 and subsequently from after school until 7.00pm and if not a school day 2.00pm until 7.00pm. 

Other orders

1. Each party shall keep the other informed as to their current residential address, mobile and landline telephone numbers and shall notify the other of any change thereto within 7 days of such change.

2. These Orders shall be sufficient authority to the day care, kindergarten and preparatory school and school at which the child attends to provide to each parent, at the cost of the requesting parent, all such reports, photographs and information as may be available which in any way relates to the child’s attendance, performance and progress at such place.

3. These Orders shall be sufficient authority to any health care professional consulted by the child to provide to each parent, at the cost of the requesting parent, all such information, diagnosis and prognosis as may be available which in any way relates to the child's health and well being.

4. PARENTING ORDERS PROGRAM

   a.each parent shall forthwith enrol and thereafter attend and complete a parenting orders program conducted by Relationships Australia, Gold Coast

   b.After completion of such course each parent shall forward to the Independent Children’s Lawyer a copy of the certificate that evidences completion of that course.

5. Neither parent shall present the child for further investigation, assessment or treatment in respect of the child allegedly being sexually abused save and except in circumstances where the Independent Children’s Lawyer has consented in writing thereto.

6. Neither parent shall endeavour to record the other at any time, either by way of audio or visual recording device.

7. Neither parent shall consume alcohol to excess whilst the child is in their care and neither shall partake in the use of illicit drugs.

8. Neither parent will show or make public to any other person any of the documents, exhibits, affidavits or reports utilised in the conduct of this case.

9. Both parents will refrain from making any derogatory or insulting comments concerning the other parent or members of that parent’s family to or in the presence or hearing of the child.

10. In the event that a decision is required to be made that relates to a parental responsibility issue then before an application be made to a Court for a decision then the following process and events must occur:

    a.Either parent shall correspond with the other in relation to the decision required and shall in that letter detail the various alternatives and seek the input of the other parent

    b.The other parent shall respond to that correspondence with 14 days, in default of which the decision of the requesting parent shall prevail

    c.In the event that the parents are unable to agree on the decision to be made they shall then utilise the services of a mediator nominated by Relationships Australia

    d.In the event that the parties are still unable to agree on a decision then any court application must include a certificate from the mediator certifying that the provisions of this paragraph have been complied with.

Specific orders concerning child’s passport and overseas travel

Passports

19.    The parties sign all necessary documents to give consent to the child obtaining an Australian and/or New Zealand passport.

Overseas travel

1. The parties each may take the child, during school holiday periods, on overseas trips, but only to Hague Convention countries, provided that the party intending to travel with the child must give the other party at least 30 days written notice of:

   (a)the itinerary;

   (b)details of accommodation and contact addresses while abroad;

   (c)evidence of payment arrangements for the child’s return airfares; and

   (d)registration of the child’s trip on Smart Traveller (or equivalent) maintained by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Custody of passports

1. The child’s passport/s are to be held by the Registrar, Family Court of Australia at Brisbane, for release to the travelling parent 14 days before the departure date for any intended travel by the child, and the travelling parent must return the child’s passport/s to the Registrar, Family Court of Australia at Brisbane, within 7 days of the child’s return to Australia.

2. The mother must ensure, by appropriate arrangement with the father, that the child at all times has a current Australian and/or New Zealand passport with more than 6 months currency before expiry. 

PACE Alert System

1. The child’s name be removed from the PACE Alert System in force at all points of arrival to and departure from of the Commonwealth of Australia. 

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRC 3659 of 2007

MR HOWE

Applicant

And

MS REEDY

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The parties’ child was born in November 2006 of a brief relationship between her parents who are Ms Reedy and Mr Howe.  Their relationship ceased shortly after her birth.  The proceedings have been on foot since March 2007 when the child was not yet 5 months old.  Presently, the child is 3 years and 4 months. 

2. There has been significant conflict between the child’s parents,  the subject of much observation by Mr M, consultant social worker, and who is the family consultant engaged in the matter.

3. The mother and the father have each filed a Notice of Child Abuse, the mother alleging sexual abuse of the child by the father and the father what he described as parental alienation by the mother. 

4. Dr L, psychiatrist, has described the mother as having a mood disorder.  He has recommended that the mother undergo a mood monitoring medical treatment plan to be conducted by a consultant psychiatrist, with sessions of at least once each month until her condition is stable and then sessions once each six months. Dr L referred also to a provisional diagnosis of the mother having a major depressive disorder, currently being treated and thus in remission. 

5. Mr M, who has provided three reports in the matter, in 2007, 2008 and 2009 respectively, has identified that the major concern in relation to the child is the circumstance of a longstanding dispute between the parents, whom he described as “intractable parents”, the dispute arising from their own dysfunctional relationship hallmarked by “no lapse of continuing acrimony between them since separation”. See, more particularly, pars 42 to 50 of Mr M’s 2009 report, extracted in Dr L’s report annexed to his affidavit filed 3 November 2009. 

6. The matter was designated Magellan on 19 November 2008, and has come on for hearing in the Magellan Special Sittings. 

7. It is against that background that, somewhat surprisingly, the parties with the assistance of the independent children’s lawyer, and Counsel, were able to present yesterday a very comprehensive set of agreed final parenting orders (Ex 3), but with two important matters requiring determination by me. 

8. In essence, the parties agreed that there should be an order that they have equal shared responsibility for the child, that she live primarily with the mother and several other matters. 

9. There are two areas of disagreement which require my determination.  They are:

   (1)the time the child should spend with the father and, in particular, it’s progressive increase between 2010 and 2013 when the child will commence school;

   (2)the changeover venue.

10. A corollary issue is as to which party should transport the child to and from the changeover venue. 

11. The circumstance that the parties have agreed that there be an order for equal shared parental responsibility has effect that I am required to consider whether an equal time order is in the child’s best interests, and reasonably practicable, and if it is, consider making such an order; and if such order not be made  consider whether a substantial and significant time order is in the child’s best interests, and reasonably practicable, and if it is, consider making such an order: MRR v GR [2010] HCA 4, being a decision of the High Court of Australia given on Wednesday last week.

12. However, the two narrow matters which I am required to determine, having regard to the extent of the parties’ and the independent children’s lawyer’s agreed parenting orders, obviates the necessity of undertaking this statutory pathway provided that I am satisfied that the proposed consent orders are in the child’s best interests.  Having regard to the history of the matter, the parties’ evidence, the independent children’s lawyer’s submissions, the submissions of the parties and the reports of the experts in the matter, Mr M and Dr L, I am so satisfied. 

13. I would add that, because allegations of abuse have been made, Rule 10.15A of the Family Law Rules 2004 requires that the parties explain to the Court how the proposed consent orders deal with the allegations, and that, by way of an annexure to the proposed consent orders they identify each document containing the allegations and explain how the orders deal with them.

14. The proposed consent orders include a preface, which I need not read out, as to the first of these matters.  Yesterday, in all of the circumstances of the case, and for reasons which I then gave, I dispensed with the requirement that the parties provide the described annexure, exercising the dispensation power in Rule 1.12 on the basis that, in the particular circumstances of the case, and in particular the preface to accompany the consent components of the order, such would place an unnecessary and undue burden on the parties and the independent children’s lawyer.  I turn, then, to the two matters requiring my determination.

Time with the father

1. The mother and the independent children’s lawyer propose that during 2010, while the child is in kindergarten, and 3 years old (turning 4 years in November 2010), the child spend time with the father on alternate weekends between 9 am Saturday and 6 pm Sunday and one night in each week overnight, being Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, at the father’s choice, being 3 nights in each fortnight. 

2. The father proposes that during 2010 the child spend time with him on alternate weekends from 6 pm Friday until 6 pm Sunday and overnight in each week Tuesday and Thursday, being 6 nights in each fortnight.

3. The mother and the independent children’s lawyer propose that during 2011, when the child will be in her pre-prep year, and 4 years old (turning 5 years in November 2011), she spend with the father on alternate weekends between 3 pm Friday and 6 pm Sunday and one night in each week overnight, being Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, at the father’s choice, being 4 nights in each fortnight. 

4. The father proposes that during 2011 the child spend the same time with him as he seeks for 2010, being 6 nights in each fortnight. 

5. The mother and the independent children’s lawyer propose that during 2012, when the child will be in her prep year and 5 years old (turning 6 years in November 2012), she spend time with the father on alternate weekends from after school on Friday until before school on Monday and one night in each week overnight, being Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, at the father’s choice, being 5 nights in each fortnight. 

6. The father proposes that in 2012 the child spend the same time with him as he seeks for 2010 and 2011, being 6 nights in each fortnight.

7. The mother and the independent children’s lawyer propose that in 2013 and following, when the child will be in Grade One and 6 years (turning 7 years in November 2013), she spend time with the father on alternate weekends from after school Friday until before school Tuesday and one night in each week overnight, being Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, at the father’s choice, being 6 nights in each fortnight. 

8. The father’s proposal for 2013 and beyond coincides with the mother’s and the independent children’s lawyer’s proposal. 

9. The parties’ and the independent children’s lawyer’s proposals are to be seen against the background of an agreement between them that the child spend additional time with the father for 3 consecutive nights 3 times during 2010 upon 42 days written notice by the father to the mother, 5 consecutive nights 4 times during 2011, with the same requisite notice, and subsequently shared school holiday time as set out in the proposed consent orders.

1. The father was critical of the mother’s and the independent children’s lawyer’s proposal on the basis that, since consent interim orders were made in the Federal Magistrates Court by FM Burnett on 30 November 2007, that is, for more than 2 years, the child has spent time with him each weekend from 5 pm Saturday until 6 pm Sunday and each Tuesday and Thursday between 4 pm and 7 pm, so that, in that period of more than 2 years the child has spent time with him with no more than a 3 day interval in between each time and indeed, with only one full day interval between each Sunday and Thursday, and one full day interval between each Tuesday and Thursday. Further, the father put forward that the mother’s and the independent children’s lawyer’s proposal reduces the number of occasions of the child spending time with him from 6 times in each fortnight to only 3 times in each fortnight.

2. In this context the father raised that the proposal of the mother and the independent children’s lawyer for 2010 and beyond would have effect that there would be intervals of up to but potentially more than 7 days when the child would not spend time with him or see him, which would be a significant change for her.

3. The father thus submitted that if there be a change from time each weekend to each alternate weekend the child should spend time with him each Tuesday and Thursday overnight so that the orders overall not result in a reduction of the time which the child, for more than 2 years, has spent with him.

4. Mr M, when questioned specifically yesterday as to these matters, said that in his view the child’s best interests would be met by her spending 3 nights in each fortnight with the father in 2010, 4 nights in each fortnight in 2011 and 5 nights in each fortnight in 2012 and beyond.  He said that it is more important for the child that attention not be paid to the number of hours in each fortnight or necessarily the interval of time spent but that I have more regard to the normalcy of the pattern for the child of spending overnight time with the father for the better development of a meaningful relationship between her and him in ordinary circumstances rather than the circumstance of what he described as “pick up and drop off in one day” which, he said, can be artificial.

5. Mr M said further that the development of the child’s relationship with the father depends on a number of things, not just the amount of time she spends with him, but the sense of security that she can develop when with him, her development of understanding of boundaries between herself and the father, the development in her of the concept that both of her parents love her and care for her and the prospect for her of developing a “normal type of relationship” between her and her parents over time so that, in his view, this is more  important now rather than “how the time is structured” at this point.  He said that in his view it is critical to the development of “that sort of meaningful relationship” between the child and the father that there thus be more “normalcy” of time, including overnight time, rather than time “just in one day”.

6. Thus, as I understand Mr M’s evidence, in his view the child’s best interests would be met by having increased overnight time with the father rather than, for example, the Tuesday and Thursday time between 4 pm and 7 pm.  However, he said that presently 4, 5 or 6 nights in each fortnight with the father would be too much acceleration for the child and that he favoured the more moderate, staggered, introduced overnight time to which I have made reference already.

7. As to the effect of change on the child if the number of occasions with the father in each fortnight were reduced, and with effect that there may be periods of up to 7 days of no time with the father and of not seeing the father, whereas the child is accustomed to spending time with him with gaps of no more than 3 days, Mr M said that the effect of such change could cause stress and anxiety for the child but that, although he was not able to assess such effect of change specifically in relation to the child, most children of her age would settle and are usually resilient with such types of change.

8. Mr M, when asked whether the solution to the “7 day gap” circumstance identified by the father might be addressed by alternate weekend time, one night overnight time in each week, say Tuesday, and a non-overnight time in each week, say Thursday, opined that he was concerned to limit the number of changeovers having regard to the parties’ intense past conflict such that he favoured fewer changes in each fortnight to limit the potential occasions of parental conflict in front of the child.

9. I am required to have regard to matters in ss 60CC-60CG Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (the Act) in determining the child’s best interests, and also the objects of the Act in s 60B.

10. In this particular case, very few of the ss 60CC-60CG matters are relevant to the narrow but important matters that I must decide. I will however mention three namely the child’s meaningful relationship with each parent, the effect of change on her and whether it is preferable to make the order least likely to lead to further proceedings.

11. The concept of meaningful relationship was examined by the Full Court in McCall & Clark (2009) FamCAFC 92 at [108]-[122]. At [119] the Full Court concluded in favour of the prospective approach, accepting at [121] as appropriate the interpretation of meaningful relationship set out by Brown J in Mazorski & Albright (2007) 37 Fam LR 518 and Bennett J in G & C [2006] FamCA 994. Thus, the Full Court concluded at [122] that the legislation requires a court to focus on the benefit to a child of a meaningful or significant relationship. 

12. I accept Mr M’s evidence as to the development of a meaningful relationship between the child and the father being developed by more overnight time than at present with the introduction of more normalcy than time spent only in one day. 

13. As to the effect of change, I accept Mr M’s evidence which I need not again set out. 

14. As to whether it is preferable to make the order least likely to lead to other proceedings concerning the child, whilst that is so, the history of the matter and her young age has effect that the immediate and short term, in my view, need imperatively to be addressed, to endeavour to put in place orders which, despite the parties’ intractable nature, one to the other, they may be able to make work in the best interests of coparenting the child rather than have a set of orders that may be likely to fail. 

15. In my view, having regard to the evidence, the submissions and the statutory matters I am required to consider, the child’s best interests would be met by accepting the proposal of the mother and the independent children’s lawyer, which I need not further set out.  In particular, such accords with Mr M’s view that at present 3 nights in each fortnight is appropriate for the child and in her best interests and that progressive development, as I have outlined, is in her best interests.  The father’s proposal of moving it immediately to 6 overnight nights in each fortnight, I would point out, is not only contrary to Mr M’s opinion as to the child’s best interests, but would involve more changeovers in each fortnight, whereas Mr M said there should be fewer rather than more. 

Changeover

1. The mother proposes her home as first preference, or the Coles Supermarket at A, near her home, as second preference.  She points to convenience in relation to her first preference, that is, convenience for herself, her other daughter, who attends school at H, and the subject child.  Her second preference is also based upon the aspect of convenience, the Coles Supermarket being a short distance, indeed walking distance, from her home.

2. The father proposes the BP Service Station at A and specifically at a spot marked X in a photographic annexure to his affidavit filed by leave today, with the father parking in the area marked “applicant’s car park” in a sketch plan also annexed to the affidavit, and entering and leaving by door A marked on the sketch plan, proceeding to point X, with him collecting the child and then exiting through the same door back to where his car is parked;  and with the mother, by reference the same sketch plan, parking her car in the area marked “respondent’s car park”, entering the door marked B and proceeding to the spot marked X, then exiting back through the same door marked B to the respondent’s car park, such that the changeover, as detailed in his affidavit, would not only take place at a well lit open space public venue, but a space at which there are closed circuit television cameras, as a disincentive for any parental conflict at changeover. 

3. The father opposes that changeover be either at the mother’s home or at the Coles Supermarket A, because of a domestic violence temporary protection order the mother obtained against him on 27 January 2010, her detailed allegations being as set out in her application for that order, annexed also to the father’s affidavit filed by leave today showing, indeed, very recently either a severe altercation in front of the child, or alternatively the allegation of such.  I couch those words carefully because the application is yet to be heard in the State Magistrates Court in April 2010.  However, whether the events described by the mother occurred or are merely alleged to have occurred, the father submitted that he wishes to avoid that venue, that is, the Coles Supermarket at A, because of the events alleged to have occurred there, and to avoid the mother’s home as a venue, because of the lack of any security camera in either place. 

4. The mother’s evidence pointed to the circumstance that the Supermarket also has security cameras, just as the BP Service Station does, but included that she has been told by personnel both at BP and at Coles that they are for the use and protection of their own staff and not for use for the resolution of private disputes. 

5. The independent children’s lawyer submitted in favour of the BP venue, not only for the reasons advanced by the father, but also having regard to Mr M’s opinion of the mother and the father being two intractable parents in a long history of dispute, combined with the difficulty of the circumstance of the mother’s recent allegations concerning an incident at the Supermarket venue proposed by the mother; and the fact that the mother’s home is “across the road” from that venue.

6. Having considered the proposals and the evidence, in my view it is plain that the changeover ought not occur at the Supermarket venue having regard to the very graphic descriptions by the mother in her very recent domestic violence application, making that venue entirely unsuitable, and that it not occur at the mother’s home, it not being a neutral venue, and there being not the advantage of being a public place, in case conflict should erupt, leaving thus not only by default, but because of what appears to me to be its desirable features, the BP Service Station at A. 

7. I will thus frame an order that the changeover occur there using the A and B doorways as described, and the X spot as described, by reference to the father’s coloured photographs and sketches annexed to his affidavit. 

8. I will add, as a corollary, that the party with whom the child is spending time deliver the child to that changeover venue for the commencement of time with the other party and that party return the child to that venue at the conclusion of time.

9. A further matter arose in relation to the proposed consent orders, namely paragraphs 2 a. iii and 2 b. iii, which provide that the child spend time with the father for 3 consecutive nights 3 times in 2010 and 5 consecutive nights 4 times in 2011, as to whether such times may be able to “link up” with and thus be consecutive with other overnight time.

10. The mother acknowledges however that this may occur with the effect of providing longer periods. In the circumstances I will add a notation to this effect.

11. I am satisfied, otherwise, that the orders proposed as consent final orders by the parties and the independent children’s lawyer are in the child’s best interests and by consent I will make those orders.

I certify that the preceding forty-eight (48) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice O’Reilly

Associate: 

Date: