Lane & Nichols

Lane & Nichols is a case where the mother appealed against interim orders that allowed the child to spend limited time with the father under supervision at a contact centre. The mother alleged that the father had sexually abused the child, while the father claimed that the allegations were fabricated. The Family Court was required to determine whether the limited supervised time with the father posed an unacceptable risk to the child, and whether there was any procedural unfairness or inconsistency in the approach of the primary judge. The court also needed to consider whether the primary judge misapprehended or failed to give sufficient weight to the evidence of a sexual assault counsellor and a family consultant.

The court found that there was no procedural unfairness or inconsistency on the part of the primary judge in the conduct and outcome of the two interim hearings. The evidence of the sexual assault counsellor and family consultant did not meet the requirements of section 55 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), and therefore, no weight could be given to it. The primary judge did not misapprehend the evidence, but even if such an error had been established, no substantial miscarriage could be founded upon the evidence. The primary judge legitimately placed weight upon the family consultant’s observations in the report process in determining the question of unacceptable risk. The reasons given by the primary judge for the orders were not inadequate, and the appeal was dismissed.

The court dismissed the appeal against the orders made by Judge L. Turner on 10 June 2016 and made no order as to the costs of the appeal. The form of the order was subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records. The court found that the primary judge had legitimately exercised their discretion in making the interim orders, and there was no error in the primary judge’s approach or reasoning. The court also found that the evidence of the sexual assault counsellor and family consultant was not admissible, and therefore, could not be relied upon in making the decision.