HUNTER & HILLMAN

In the matter of *Hunter & Hillman*, Bennett J considered an application to discharge and vary previous orders concerning the Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL) and the disclosure of reports in family law proceedings. The dispute involved the father's request for specific reports to be provided to the girls' treating psychologists and clarification regarding the ICL's role in facilitating a conference between Ms R and Dr S.

The court was required to determine whether certain paragraphs of existing orders should be discharged, what information the ICL should provide to the children's treating psychologists, and whether the father should be granted leave to provide a report to the Magistrates' Court for intervention order proceedings. The court also needed to clarify the extent of the ICL's obligation, if any, to arrange or ensure Ms R's participation in a conference with Dr S.

Bennett J discharged paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of the order made on 27 May 2019. The court clarified that paragraph 5 of that order did not compel the ICL to arrange a conference between Ms R and Dr S, nor did it require Ms R to participate. However, if Ms R did participate, she was to reference it in her report. Paragraph 7 of the 27 May 2019 order and paragraph 1 of the order made on 12 April 2019 were discharged and replaced with a new direction for the ICL to send specific reports and documents to the girls' respective treating psychologists. The ICL was also ordered to inform the older girls of the new order.

The father was granted leave to make an oral application to provide Ms R’s report dated 12 February 2019 to the presiding Magistrate or Clerk of the Magistrates’ Court for intervention order proceedings. The court further ordered that its reasons be transcribed and provided to the parties.