JOSEPHS & LORENZO

[2019] FCCA 929

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

JOSEPHS & LORENZO [2019] FCCA 929

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting arrangements for child aged eleven – child refuses to spend time with the father – father alleges mother has influenced the child – meaningful level of relationship – best interests.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975; s.60CC

Applicant: MR JOSEPHS

Respondent: MS LORENZO

File Number: ADC 4244 of 2018

Judgment of: Judge Brown

Hearing date: 15 February 2019

Date of Last Submission: 15 February 2019

Delivered at: Adelaide

Delivered on: 15 February 2019

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Roberts

Solicitors for the Applicant: Lachlan McAuliffe

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Fuda

Solicitors for the Respondent: Nikki Ireland

ORDERS

1. Pursuant to Section 68L of the Family Law Act 1975 THAT an Independent Children’s Lawyer be appointed to represent the interests of the child X born in 2008 and to facilitate such appointment the Parties’ respective solicitors do forward all relevant documents to Mr Graham Russell of the Legal Services Commission of South Australia within seven (7) days of today’s date and that the Independent Children’s Lawyer use his or her best endeavours to be in a position to make submissions to the Court on the adjourned date.

2. Immediately upon appointment by the said Legal Services Commission of South Australia or otherwise, the Independent Children’s Lawyer file a Notice of Address for Service.

3. Until further or other order the time for the father to spend with the child X be suspended.

4. Further consideration of the matter is adjourned to 10 April 2019 at 9:30am for directions.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT ADELAIDE

ADC 4244 of 2018

MR JOSEPHS

Applicant

And

MS LORENZO

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. These reasons for judgment were delivered orally immediately following the interim hearing concerned.  Given the importance of the issue to the parties concerned, it is appropriate that the reasons be transcribed and provided to each of them. 

2. It is also hoped that they will be of assistance to the Independent Children’s Lawyer, who will be appointed as a consequence of an order which will be made following the completion of these reasons.

Background

1. This afternoon, I have to deal with an application in which Mr Josephs is the applicant and Ms Lorenzo is the respondent.  It is convenient to refer to Mr Josephs as “the father” and to Ms Lorenzo as “the mother” in these reasons for judgment.

2. The parties are the parents of X, who was born in 2008.  So X has had her 11^th birthday last year and at this stage is about 11 years and four months of age. 

3. As such, she is to be regarded as a child who is of an age when she is obviously capable of expressing a preference, but at the same time must be considered as being far from a full…