Levok & Blasic

[2023] FedCFamC1F 231

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 1)

Levok & Blasic [2023] FedCFamC1F 231

File number(s):	BRC 8827 of 2022
Judgment of:	BAUMANN J
Date of judgment:	19 January 2023
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – ADOPTION – Leave to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld)
Division:	Division 1 First Instance
Number of paragraphs:	3
Date of last submission/s:	19 January 2023
Date of hearing:	19 January 2023
Place:	Brisbane
Counsel for the Applicants:	Mr Cameron
Solicitor for the Applicants:	Springwood Lawyers
Respondent:	Litigant in person (did not participate)

ORDERS

BRC 8827 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MR LEVOK

First Applicant

MS LEVOK

Second Applicant

AND:

MR BLASIC

Respondent

order made by:	BAUMANN J
DATE OF ORDER:	19 JANUARY 2023

THE COURT ORDERS:

1.That pursuant to s 60G of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the First Applicant, MR LEVOK be granted leave to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld) for the adoption of the child, X born 2007 (“the child”).

Note:   The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

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

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Settled from the oral reasons delivered)

BAUMANN J:

1. This is a proceeding that relates to an application for leave to adopt, by Mr Levok and the biological mother, Ms Levok, of a child, X, who was born in 2007 and who has recently turned 16 years of age.  A well-prepared application which I will deal with shortly, has, I am satisfied, been served upon the Respondent biological father, Mr Blasic, even before the application was filed in this Court.

2. As a matter of prudency, a solicitor retained by the Applicants wrote to Mr Blasic asking whether he would consent to an application for leave to adopt and in somewhat colourful language in an email dated 22 February 2022, Mr Blasic made it clear that:

   [n]ow that I am aware of the proceedings and provided consent, I consider this issue dealt with and strongly advise yourself and [Ms Levok] against interfering in my life in the future.

   (Emphasis in original)

3. The evidence before the Court makes it abundantly clear that X has been a member of the household constituted by the Applicants since at least cohabitation of those parties in 2011 when X was but four years of age.  He is in every way a member of the household.  He is treated by Mr Levok as his son and has, in all respects, a happy and meaningful life.  He also has a little sister, Y, who was born 2012.  All the evidence properly before the Court, confirmed by both Mr Levok and his wife, the biological mother, Ms Levok, satisfies me that it is in the best interests of X that leave be granted to bring an application to adopt X, and that will be the order of the Court.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Baumann.

Associate:  

Dated:       29 May 2023