Langley and Folett

Case

[2016] FamCA 137

8 March 2016


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Langley and Folett [2016] FamCA 137 [2016] FamCA 137 8 March 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Langley and Folett*, heard by Faulks DCJ, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for two children, N and B. The primary issue before the court was to determine the living arrangements for the children, including parental responsibility, the location of their primary residence, and the nature and extent of the father's time with them, as well as provisions for communication and international travel.

The court was required to make orders regarding the children's primary residence, parental responsibility, and the father's time with the children, which was to be supervised. Further, the court had to consider the mother's application to relocate the children to Newcastle and address the father's ability to communicate with the children, including provisions for telephone and Skype contact. The court also had to determine whether to dispense with the father's consent for the issuance of Australian passports for the children and to establish conditions for overseas travel by the mother with the children.

Faulks DCJ ordered that the children would live primarily with their mother, Ms Langley, who would have sole parental responsibility. The mother was permitted to relocate the children to Newcastle. The father's time with the children was to be supervised, with specific provisions for frequency, duration, and location, including the father bearing the cost of supervision and travel to Newcastle. The court also made orders for weekly telephone or Skype contact, with the father to initiate calls, and for the children to be able to telephone their father at reasonable times. The father's consent for the issuance of Australian passports for the children was dispensed with. The mother's overseas travel with the children was permitted under certain conditions, including providing notice and an itinerary to the father. All communication between the parents regarding the children was to be via email, and both parents were ordered not to speak negatively about the other parent in the children's presence.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Jurisdiction

  • Appeal

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

2

Murphy and Curtis [2016] FamCA 474
COLBROOKE & MAREET [2018] FCCA 3397
Cases Cited

3

Statutory Material Cited

3

Briginshaw v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34
Sayer v Radcliffe [2012] FamCAFC 209
Sayer v Radcliffe [2012] FamCAFC 209