Jasentu and Suwandaratne

[2016] FamCA 287

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

JASENTU & SUWANDARATNE [2016] FamCA 287

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Transfer of proceedings

APPLICANT: Ms Jasentu

RESPONDENT: Mr Suwandaratne

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Legal Aid NSW Parramatta

FILE NUMBER: PAC 3048 of 2015

DATE DELIVERED: 21 April 2016

PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta

PLACE HEARD: Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF: Hannam

HEARING DATE: 18 April 2016

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Gittoe-ceasar

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Cameron

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Ms Soliman

Orders

1. The proceedings are transferred to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia on a date to be advised.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: PAC 3048  of 2015

Ms Jasentu

Applicant

And

Mr Suwandaratne

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. Parenting proceedings were commenced in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in June 2015.

2. In July 2015 a Judge the Federal Circuit Court transferred the proceedings to the Family Court.  Although the reason for the transfer is not entirely clear, I was informed on 18 April 2016 that one of the reasons may have been that it was anticipated that the parties’ property dispute may have involved overseas property.

3. It has eventuated that there were no property proceedings involving overseas property and that the only matter to be judicially determined is the competing parenting applications with respect to the parties’ only child.

4. The child currently lives with his mother and spends four nights per fortnight with his father as well as half the school holidays.

5. As I understand the respective positions of the parties, the parenting dispute between them is of narrow compass.  The mother seeks that the interim orders continue on a final basis while the father seeks a similar pattern of care but with the child living with him and spending time with his mother.  An Expert Report has been obtained with quite clear recommendations.  It is likely that the matter will be resolved in two to three hearing days. 

6. The matter appears to be of the appropriate level of complexity to be resolved in the Federal Circuit Court.

7. The only matter put on behalf of the parties in relation to the transfer was a concern about the delay in hearing dates if the matter were to be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court.  There are currently also extensive delays in the Family Court. In this Registry a matter such as this will not receive priority where there are other matters to be allocated hearing dates on a much more urgent basis such as where immediate risk to the harm of children and alike are present.  In these circumstances the interests of justice are such that it is appropriate to transfer the matter to the Federal Circuit Court.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Hannam delivered on 21 April 2016.

Legal Associate:

Date:  21 April 2016