LING & GLAZIER

[2019] FamCA 327

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

LING & GLAZIER [2019] FamCA 327

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final parenting orders – parental responsibility – best interests – where the mother seeks sole parental responsibility – where the mother seeks that the father’s time with the child be significantly reduced – where there are allegations that the father poses a risk of physical and psychological harm to the child – where it is alleged the father has failed to act protectively whilst the child is in his care –  where the child does not wish for time with the father to be reduced –  where it is not in the best interests of the child for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility – order that the mother have sole parental responsibility – where the father has failed to act protectively –  where the risk to the child posed by the father is minimised during time spent together during the day – order for the father’s overnight time with the child to be reduced – where father seeks that his time be increased.

FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Whether order for non-periodic child support should be varied.

Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) s 117, 124, 123, 129
Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 140
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 60B, 60CC, 60CA, 61DA, 65DAA, 69ZN, 79

Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336
M v M (1988) 166 CLR 69
Mazorski & Albright [2007] FamCA 520; (2007) 37 Fam LR 518
McCall & Clark [2009] FamCAFC 92; (2009) FLC 93-405
Mulvany & Lane (2009) FLC 93-404
U v U (2002) 211 CLR 238

APPLICANT: Ms Ling

RESPONDENT: Mr Glazier

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Nicholes Family Lawyers

FILE NUMBER: MLC 3707 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 22 May 2019

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Johns J

HEARING DATE: 16,17 & 18 April 2018 and 17,18,19, 20 & 30 July 2018

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT: In Person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Fronistas

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Kyrou Lawyers

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mr Turner

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Nicholes Family Lawyers

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

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

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 3707 of 2007

Ms Ling

Applicant

And

Mr Glazier

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. The applicant mother and respondent father are parents to one child, Y, who is aged 13 years.

2. The mother and father have been in dispute over parenting arrangements for Y for a number of years. The first set of proceedings, which commenced in 2007, were finalised by consent orders made in 2010.  In 2015, the mother commenced these proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court; she then sought orders for the discharge of the previous orders, that she have sole parental responsibility for Y, that Y live with her and that the father’s time with Y be reserved.

3. The mother’s application is motivated by her concern that Y is at risk in the father’s care.  She alleges that the father has at times failed to appropriately supervise Y, including leaving her unattended at a play centre and in a hospital car park, that he has not appropriately monitored or controlled her access to books and on-line content, including games and movies, and that Y has been exposed to his uncontained anger and violence.

4. In addition to those matters, the mother seeks orders with respect to Y’s ongoing financial support by the father.

5. The father rejects the mother’s contentions as to his conduct and alleges that she is embarking on a campaign to alienate Y from him.

6. At the final hearing, the two principal issues for determination included the time that Y should spend with the father and the allocation of parental responsibility. There is no dispute between the parties that Y is to remain living with the mother.

7. Y currently spends four nights per fortnight with the father, three nights in the first week and one night in the second week.

8. The mother seeks to significantly reduce the time Y spends with the father.  At trial the mother amended her position such that it is her proposal that Y spend one week with the father during each school holiday period and for specified times on special days; it is her position that Y should spend no time with the father during school terms.

9. The father seeks that the child spend time with him for five consecutive nights per fortnight.

10. These are my Reasons for Judgment with respect to the parties’ competing applications.

Background

1. The mother is aged 47 years.  She was born in Country R and migrated to Australia in 2005, after the commencement of the parties’ relationship.  The mother is currently unemployed.

2. The father is aged 74 years and is a health professional. 

3. The parties married in 2002 and commenced cohabitation in 2002. The father asserts the parties separated in February 2005 whilst the mother maintains that separation occurred in April 2005. Little turns on the date of separation.  It is common ground that Y was born after separation in 2005.

4. Final property orders were made between the parties on 26 May 2006. The parties divorced in 2006.

5. Final parenting orders were made on 8 November 2010 by Federal Magistrate O’Sullivan in the Federal Magistrates’ Court, as it was then known (“the Final Orders”). The Final Orders provided that the child live with the mother and that the parents have equal shared parental responsibility. The Final Orders also provided that once Y commenced school, she was to spend time with the father as follows:

   ·During school term, in the first week each alternate weekend from Friday after school until Monday at the commencement of school, save that if the Monday is a Public Holiday, time shall be extended to the Tuesday;

   ·During the school term, in the second week each alternate Tuesday until the commencement of school on Wednesday;

   ·Half school term holidays.

6. The Final Orders also provided for Y to spend time with the parties on special days and for the child to communicate with the father each Thursday and Sunday between 6.30pm and 7.30pm.

7. Y continues to spend time with the father in accordance with the Final Orders.

8. Order 18 of the Final Orders also provided as follows:

   (a)That the child shall attend [Suburb B School] commencing Tuesday 1 February 2011.

   (b)The father shall be responsible for paying all the tuition fees, school uniform, books and extra curricular activities.

   (c)That both parents are allowed to attend all school activities including sporting activities and parent/teacher interviews and the like;

   (d)That both parents shall ensure the child attends school and all extra curricular activities organized through [Suburb B School].

   (e)That both parents do all acts and things, including completion of enrolment forms, necessary to enrol the child at Suburb B School].

9. Following the making of the Final Orders the mother alleges that she became increasingly concerned as to the father’s behaviour and its impact upon Y.  The mother alleges that the father did not act protectively towards Y and that on occasions Y was placed at risk when in the father’s care.  I will address those allegations in more detail later in this judgment.

10. Matters came to a head in January 2015.  On 26 January 2015, when Y was aged 9 years, the father left the child unattended at a play centre in Town S for several hours.  When the centre was due to close and the father had failed to collect Y, the workers at the play centre contacted the Police.  The Police located the father at his home and returned Y to his care.

11. Two days later on 28 January 2015 the father left the child sleeping and unattended in his vehicle which was parked outside Suburb T Hospital whilst he attended the emergency department at the hospital for treatment.  When the hospital staff became aware that Y was in the father’s vehicle, she was brought into the hospital and a notification was made by the hospital staff to the Department of Health and Human Services.

12. As a result of those events, the mother did not permit the child to spend time with the father between 28 January 2015 and 24 April 2015.  She filed an Initiating Application in the Federal Circuit Court on 30 January 2015.  That application sought interim orders that the mother have sole parental responsibility for Y and that until further order the child spend time with the father at a contact centre.

13. In addition to the parenting proceedings, on 2 February 2015 the mother sought and obtained an interim intervention order against the father in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria.  That order named the mother and the child as affected family members.[1]

    [1] Exhibit M-15.

14. On 20 February 2015 the mother sought and obtained a variation of the interim intervention order to provide that, pursuant to s 69R of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”), the operation of the Final Orders be suspended for a period of 21 days. The father was not served with that application and the order was made in his absence.[2]

    [2] Exhibit M-20.

15. On 1 April 2015 a further interim intervention order was made against the father for the protection of the mother and the child. The father was present at the hearing and agreed to that order being made.  On that occasion no order was made suspending the operation of the Final Orders.[3]

    [3] Exhibit M-19.

16. The intervention order proceedings concluded on 25 May 2015.  That day, upon the father giving an undertaking to the Court (without admission as to the mother’s allegations) not to approach the mother’s residence or to communicate with her save as provided in the undertaking, the mother withdrew her application before the Court.  That undertaking expired on 25 May 2016.[4]

    [4] Exhibit F-10.

17. The mother’s parenting application came before the Federal Circuit Court on 22 April 2015.  That day Judge Stewart made an order appointing an Independent Children’s Lawyer (“the ICL”). Further, an order was made by consent that the Final Orders remain in full force and effect, with the Father’s alternate weekend time to resume on 24 April 2015.  The child was also placed on the Airport Watch List; that order expired on 22 April 2017.

18. The matter returned to court on 25 June 2015.  That day orders and directions were made listing the matter for final hearing (“the June 2015 Orders”).  The parties were ordered to attend for psychiatric assessment and the preparation of a family report.  In addition, orders were made by consent that:

    …

    (6)The Father be restrained by injunction from permitting or enabling [Y] to:

    (a)      Access the internet without supervision;

    (b)Access any websites the major theme of which is death or horror;

    (c)Engage in on-line chats or similar forms of communication with adult persons other than family members or persons known to the Father;

    (d)Play any video, computer or electronic game the major theme of which is death or horror; and

    (e)Watch any film or television program that is not rated G or PG.

    (7)The Father do all acts and things required to install child safety protection software on all computers and other devices within the household capable of accessing the internet.

    (8)The Father be restrained from leaving [Y] unsupervised at any time during which she is in his care and contact the Mother immediately upon becoming aware of any inability to supervise her or to make arrangements for her to be supervised.

    (9)The Father ensure that [Y] has a mobile telephone in her possession or available to her, switched on and charged at all times when he is in care.

    …

19. The proceedings were transferred to this Court on 24 October 2016.

20. Trial directions were made on 22 September 2017.  Although the hearing was originally listed to commence in January 2018, due to the unavailability of witnesses the final hearing commenced before me on 16 April 2018. After three days the matter was adjourned part-heard, eventually resuming in July and concluding on 30 July 2018.

Documents relied upon

1. The mother relied on the following documents:-

   ·Case Outline filed 9 April 2018;

   ·Further Amended Initiating Application filed 5 October 2017;

   ·Affidavit of the mother filed 5 October 2017;

   ·Affidavit of the mother filed 8 November 2017;

   ·Affidavit of the mother filed 22 January 2018;

   ·Financial Statement filed 5 October 2017;

   ·Family Report prepared by Ms C dated 20 September 2016;

   ·Updated Family Report prepared by Ms C dated 8 December 2017;

   ·Addendum Family Report prepared by Ms C dated 5 February 2018;

   ·Psychiatric assessment of the father prepared by Dr D dated 1 July 2016;

   ·Psychiatric assessment of the mother prepared by Dr G dated 13 October 2016;

   ·Child Inclusive Conference Memorandum prepared by Ms H dated 22 April 2015.

2. In addition to those documents, the mother relied upon documents tendered by her during the course of the trial (Exhibits M-1 to M-21 inclusive).

3. The father relied on the following documents:

   ·Case Outline filed 10 April 2018;

   ·Amended Response filed 8 September 2017;

   ·Affidavit of the father filed 16 November 2017;

   ·Financial Statement filed 27 October 2017;

   ·Affidavit of Ms J filed 31 October 2017;

   ·Affidavit of Mr K filed 8 February 2018;

   ·Psychiatric assessment of the father prepared by Dr D dated 1 July 2016;

   ·Child Inclusive Conference Memorandum prepared by Ms H dated 22 April 2015;

   ·Transcript of Proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court on 22 April 2015 (Evidence of Ms H); and

   ·Documents tendered on his behalf during the hearing (Exhibits …).

4. The ICL relied on the following documents:

   ·Case Outline filed 9 April 2018;

   ·Family Report prepared by Ms C dated 20 September 2016;

   ·Updated Family Report prepared by Ms C dated 8 December 2017;

   ·Addendum Family Report prepared by Ms C dated 5 February 2018;

   ·Psychiatric assessment of the father prepared by Dr D dated 1 July 2016;

   ·Psychiatric assessment of the mother prepared by Dr G dated 13 October 2016;

   ·Documents tendered on behalf of the ICL during the hearing (Exhibits ICL-1 to ICL-3).

Orders Sought

1. The mother sought orders in the terms of the minute tendered by her during her closing submissions (Exhibit M-21).  The mother’s proposed orders were extensive, addressing parenting issues, her personal protection and child support.  The orders sought by her included that:-

   ·She have sole parental responsibility in respect of all major long term issues in respect of the child.

   ·She advise the father in writing (electronic or otherwise) and provide her view about any major issue affecting the child’s health or education and consult with the father about such issues, but if no agreement is reached with respect to such issues within a week, the mother have the final decision and advise the father in writing of that decision.

   ·The child live with the Mother.

   ·The child spend time with and communicate with the father as follows:

   i.For one week of each term holiday until 30 December 2023, such week to be agreed between the parties and in default of agreement to alternate between the first week of the school holidays in odd numbered years and second week in even numbered years;

   ii.The father provide clear information about the care arrangements for the child including his work schedule and availability to attend to Y’s care in writing to the mother a month prior to the commencement of the holiday period;

   iii.On the child’s birthday in even numbered years and Christmas day in odd numbered years with the Mother to spend time with the child on her birthday in odd numbered years and on Christmas day in even numbered years;

   iv.On Father’s Day from 10 am to 6pm.

   v.By telephone to the child each Thursday between 6.30pm and 7.30pm when the child is spending time with the mother.

   vi.The mother be permitted to telephone the child any day between 6.30pm and 7.30pm when the child is spending time with the father.

   vii.The father be permitted to send to the child a birthday card, Christmas card, and electronic messages on her birthday and on Christmas Day and be permitted to send the child a birthday present and Christmas present.

   ·The father keep the mother informed of all addresses at which the child spends overnight time.

   ·The father be restrained by injunction from permitting Y to:

   i.Access the internet without supervision;

   ii.Access any websites, play any video, computer or electronic game and watch any film, television program or content that is not age appropriate; and

   iii.Engage in on-line chats or similar forms of communication with adult persons other than family members or persons known to the parents;

   ·The father do all acts and things required to install child safety protection software on all computers and other devices within the household capable of accessing the internet.

   ·The father be restrained from leaving the child unsupervised at any time during which she is in his care and contact the mother immediately upon becoming aware of any inability to supervise her.

   ·The father be restrained by injunction from publishing on the internet, by email or other electronic communication any material about the child and the Mother.

   ·The father ensure that the child has a mobile phone in her possession or available to her, switched on and charged at all times when she is in his care.

   ·The mother be at liberty to enrol the child in any school and that the father be responsible for the costs of all uniforms, books, tuition fees, extra- curricular activities, overseas exchange programs, camps and levies made by the school which shall continue until she completes her education at such school.

   ·The father, his servants and agents shall establish a trust fund for the child’s long term education.

   ·The Father shall contribute to the cost of the child’s university education at least half.

   ·The mother shall authorize and direct the school, at which the child attends to forward copies of reports, photographs, newsletters and the line to the father at the expense of the father.

   ·That the child be allowed to travel overseas for a period of up to 8 weeks with the mother.

   ·That the father, his servants and agents be restrained by injunction from:- 

   i.Attending on or in the vicinity of any residence, venue for event, property or school at which the child and the mother may from time to time reside or attend.

   ii.Photographing, recording, videoing or keeping the other party and/or their companions under surveillance;

   iii.Publishing on the internet, by email or other electronic communication any material about the child and the mother.

   iv.Contacting or attempting to contact the child and the mother by any direct or indirect means save and except as provided in these Orders.

   v.Taking or sending or attempting to take or send the child Y from the Commonwealth of Australia and/or from any other country, that prohibition to continue until 31 December 2023.

   ·That the parties keep the other informed of any significant medical and/or health issues concerning the child, and authorize and direct any medical practitioner or the like upon whom the child attend to discuss the child’s medical condition with, and forward copies of any report and the like to the other party and the parties shall implement and adhere to any treatment regime specified by the child’s treating medical practitioners. Each party shall notify all of the child’s treating professionals that the other party is the child’s next of kin, and provide the other party’s details to the professional.

   ·The father provide and maintain the private health insurance for the child at the father’s cost.

   ·The father pays the cost of the child’s psychologist.

   ·The parties be restrained from:

   i.Denigrating the other in the presence or hearing of the child:

   ii.Discussing these proceedings in the presence or hearing of the child.

   ·Changeovers occur wherever possible at the child’s school or otherwise outside the milk bar at L Street, Suburb X at the commencement of the father’s time and from the father’s residence at the conclusion of his time or at such other place as may be agreed in writing.

1. On several occasions during the course of the hearing the mother gave evidence that in the event parenting orders were not made in the terms sought by her, the child should live with the father and the mother would have no further involvement in the child’s life.  Notwithstanding those statements, the mother did not seek orders in those terms.

2. The father sought orders in accordance with the minute of order tendered during closing submissions (Exhibit F-11).  The orders sought by him include:-         

   ·That the mother and father have equal shared parental responsibility for the child in relation to all health matters including medical, dental and psychological.

   ·The Mother have sole parental responsibility for Y in relation to all other matters including but not limited to extracurricular activities, but excluding all health matters and matters relating to education and that the mother notify the father in writing of any decision made by her within 24 hours of such decision.

   ·That Y live with the mother.

   ·That the father shall spend time with and communicate with the child as follows:

   i.Commencing on the first Friday after the date of these Orders and the beginning of each school term, each alternate week from the conclusion of school on Friday until the commencement of school on Wednesday;

   ii.In 2021, on other days as requested by Y;

   iii.For half of each of the school term vacations including the summer vacation, such half to be agreed between the parties and in default of agreement to alternate between the first half of the school holidays in odd numbered years and the second half in even numbered years.

3. The father also provided an alternative position on the last page of Exhibit F-11 in relation to the time the child spends with the father, which is as follows:

   Commencing first Friday of school term 2019

   (a)Each alternate week from conclusion of school on Friday until the commencement of school on the following Tuesday;

   (b)In the alternate week from the conclusion of school on Wednesday until 8:30pm.

   Commencing first Friday of school term 2020

   Each alternate week from conclusion of school on Friday until the commencement of school on the following Wednesday.

   Commencement of first Friday of school term 2021

   (a)Each alternate week from conclusion of school on Friday until the commencement of school on the following Wednesday

   (b)On other days as requested by Y.

4. The father’s minute also sought orders with respect to changeovers, telephone communication, time spent on special days, overseas travel and Y’s education and extra-curricular activities.  The father also proposed that there be orders regulating the child’s use of and access to the internet and social media.

5. As to Y’s education, the father sought orders that Y remain at her current secondary school and in the event that she obtains a full scholarship to a private school or gains entry to a select public high school, she be permitted to change school and the parties do all such acts and sign all such documents to enrol Y into the said school.  The father proposed that the parties share equally the tuition fees for Y’s current school or select entry public high school and school authorised extracurricular expenses, including Y’s student exchange trip to Country Z organised by the school.  Otherwise he proposed that the mother be solely responsible for any other extracurricular activities chosen by her for Y to attend.

6. Like the mother, the father sought highly prescriptive orders in relation to almost every aspect of Y’s life.  That approach merely highlighted the degree of conflict between them and the dogmatic and inflexible position maintained by each throughout the proceedings.

7. The ICL sought orders in the terms of Exhibit ICL-3, which provides as follows:

   Parental Responsibility

   1.That the Mother and Father have equal shared parental responsibility for Y born in 2005 in relation to all medical matters.

   2.The Mother have sole parental responsibility for Y in relation to all other matters including but not limited to extracurricular activities, but excluding all medical matters in accordance with Order 1 and matters relating to education in accordance with Orders 14, 15 ,16 and 17.

   Live with/spend time with Orders

   3.That Y live with the Mother.

   4.Commencing on the first Friday after the date of these Orders, that Y spend time with the Father as follows:

   (a)Each alternate week from the conclusion of school on Friday until the commencement of school until 6:00 pm on Sunday.the following and [sic]

   (b)In the alternate week from the conclusion of school on Tuesday until the commencement of school on Wednesday;

   (c)One half of each of the term school holidays on a week about basis by agreement and in default of agreement Y spend the first week of the school holidays with the Father and on a week about basis;

   (d)For a two week period commencing 10:00am on 28th December in 2018 until 6:00 pm on the 11th of January 2019 and each alternate year thereafter;

   (e)For a two week period commencing at 10:00am on 11th January 2020 until 6:00pm on 25th January 2020 and each alternate year thereafter; and

   (f)That the time spent with the Father in accordance with Order 4(a) will re­commence the first week after school commences.

   5.That if the Father wishes to spend time with Y during the holiday period whilst he works in country Victoria and/or New South Wales the Father provide clear information about the care arrangements for Y in writing to the Mother one week before the commencement of any holiday period.

   6.That the Mother be at liberty to telephone Y when Y is not in her care for not more than 15 minutes every second day when Y is not in the Mother's care.

   7.That while Y is in the Father's care the Father ensure Y is not exposed to pornography or any inappropriate sexual material on the internet or otherwise and purchase internet protection software for all of his devices to which Y has access.

   8.That the Father be restrained and an injunction be granted restraining the Father from distributing, disseminating, publishing or otherwise making available photographs of Y to any person or persons, other than immediate family members, via any form of social media and/or dating website(s).

   9.Y spend not more than seven (7) consecutive days at a time with the Father during school term holidays.

   10.That Y spend time with the Father at other times as agreed between the parties in writing, which includes by email and text message.

   Special days for the Husband

   11.Notwithstanding paragraph 3 herein, the Mother's time with Y be suspended and Y spend time with the Father as follows:

   (a)At any school Father's Day function held outside ordinary school hours;

   (b)From 6.00pm on the Saturday preceding Father's Day until 6:00pm on Father's Day;

   (c)On the Father's and Y's birthdays, for a minimum period of three hours by agreement and in default of agreement from the conclusion of school or 3:30pm to 7:30pm should either birthday fall on a weekday and for a minimum period of five hours by agreement and in default of agreement from 2:30pm until 7:30pm should either birthday fall on a weekend;

   (d)From 5:00pm on Christmas Eve until 5:00pm on Christmas Day in 2019 and each alternate year thereafter;

   (e)From 5:00pm on Christmas Day until 5:00pm on Boxing Day in 2018 and each alternate year thereafter; and

   Special days for the Wife

   12.Notwithstanding paragraph 4 herein, the Father's time with Y be suspended and Y spend time with the Mother as follows:

   (a)At any school Mother's Day function held outside ordinary school hours;

   (b)From 6:00pm on the Saturday preceding Mother's Day until 6:00pm on Mother's Day;

   (c) On the Mother's and Y's birthdays, for a minimum period of three hours by agreement and in default of agreement from the conclusion of school or 3:30pm to 7:30pm should either birthday fall on a weekday and for a minimum period of five hours by agreement and in default of agreement from 2:00pm until 7:00pm should either birthday fall on a weekend;

   (d)From 5:00pm on Christmas Day until 5:00pm on Boxing Day in 2019 and each alternate year thereafter;

   (e)From 5:00pm on Christmas Eve until 5:00pm on Christmas Day in 2018 and each alternate year thereafter; and

   (f)At other times as agreed between the parties in writing, which includes by email or text message.

   Medical

   13.That each parent shall keep the other fully advised of any significant medical or health issue concerning Y.

   Education

   14.That Y continue to attend Suburb B School.

   15.In the event that Y obtains a full scholarship to a private school or a selective government school such as N School she is permitted to change/attend the respective private or selective school and the parties do all such acts and sign all such documents to enrol Y into the said school.

   16.The parties share the tuition fees of Y's school and all extracurricular expenses equally including Y's student exchange trip to Country Z organised by the school.

   17.In the event that Y obtain a "part scholarship" to a private school she will be permitted to change/attend the respective school and the parties do all such acts and sign all such documents to enrol Y to attend the said school provided that the parents are able to agree on who will pay for the fees that are not covered by the part scholarship.

   Passports

   18.That the parties shall do all things and sign all documents necessary to obtain an Australian passport for Y, and thereafter, to ensure that Y has a current Australian passport at all times at their joint expense.

   19.At times when Y is not travelling overseas, the Mother will retain Y's passport.

   Travel

   20.That Y be permitted to leave the Commonwealth of Australia, notwithstanding that the consent of the Father has not been obtained.

   21.That either of the parties be permitted to travel to international destinations with Y subject to the following conditions:

   (a)The international travel will be to destinations within countries who are signatories to the Hague Convention (Civil Aspects of Child Abduction).                     

   (b)Sixty days prior to departure, the travelling party will advise the other party in writing of his or her intention to travel to an international destination.

   (c)Thirty days prior to departure, the travelling party will provide to the other party a copy of the proposed itinerary of travel and a copy of the return aeroplane ticket to the international destination.

   (d)Such travel will take place within school term holiday or Christmas holiday periods unless consent is provided to travel outside these periods by the other party.

   (e)Time in lieu will apply to any time lost by one party due to the international travel by Y with the other party.

   (f)That the Mother not unreasonably withhold her consent to Y travelling overseas with the Father.

   22.That for the duration of the overseas travel referred to in paragraph 19 hereof:

   (a)The Mother shall advise the Father by telephone or email or text message or other electronic means each week of the arrangements for and the wellbeing of Y .

   (b)The Father communicate by telephone with Y as Y wishes but at least twice per week.                

   (c)In the event of any illness or injury to Y, the Mother shall forthwith notify the Father of any such illness or injury.

   23.That upon return of the Mother and Y to Australia:

   (a)Time in lieu will apply to any time lost by the Father due to the international travel by Y with the Mother.

   Restraint

   24.That until further order, the Mother and the Father, their servants and agents be and are hereby restrained by injunction from:

   (a)Abusing, insulting, belittling, rebuking or otherwise denigrating the other; and

   (b)discussing these proceedings,

   (c)to, with or in the presence or hearing of Y , and from permitting any other person to do so.

   Independent Children's Lawyer

   25.That Y attend upon the Independent Children's Lawyer to have the Orders explained;

   26.That the Independent Children's Lawyer be discharged 30 days after the date of the Orders.

   Other

   27.That all extant Applications are otherwise dismissed.

   28.Pursuant to s.65DA(2) and s.628, the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these orders and details of who can assist the parties adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

PARENTING ORDERS - LEGAL PRINCIPLES

1. Section 60B(1) of the Act sets out the objects of Part VII of the Act, to ensure the best interests of children are met by:

   (a)ensuring that children have the benefit of both of their parents having a meaningful involvement in their lives, to the maximum extent consistent with the best interests of the child; and

   (b)protecting children from physical or psychological harm from being subjected to, or exposed to, abuse, neglect or family violence; and

   (c)ensuring that children receive adequate and proper parenting to help them achieve their full potential; and

   (d)ensuring that parents fulfil their duties, and meet their responsibilities, concerning the care, welfare and development of their children.

2. Section 60B(2) of the Act sets out the principles underlying those objects. They are that (except when it is or would be contrary to a child’s best interests):

   (a)children have the right to know and be cared for by both their parents, regardless of whether their parents are married, separated, have never married or have never lived together; and

   (b)children have a right to spend time on a regular basis with, and communicate on a regular basis with, both their parents and other people significant to their care, welfare and development (such as grandparents and other relatives); and

   (c)parents jointly share duties and responsibilities concerning the care, welfare and development of their children; and

   (d)parents should agree about the future parenting of their children; and

   (e)children have a right to enjoy their culture (including the right to enjoy that culture with other people who share that culture).

3. In deciding a particular parenting order the best interests of the child is the paramount consideration (s 60CA of the Act). As was observed by the High Court in U v U (2002) 211 CLR 238, the Court’s power to make orders it considers to be in a child’s best interests is not limited by the parties’ proposals.

4. Section 60CC(2) and (3) of the Act set out the primary and additional considerations the Court must have regard to in determining what is in the child’s best interests. The Court must give greater weight to the need to protect the child from physical or psychological harm and from being exposed to abuse, neglect or family violence (s 60CC(2)(b)). Otherwise, there is no requirement for the primary and additional considerations to be considered in a particular order or for any of those considerations to be afforded greater weight than others. Ultimately, the weight to be given to each of the considerations will depend upon the unique circumstances of each case.

5. As to the manner in which the Court is to take into account those considerations May and Thackray JJ stated in Mulvany & Lane (2009) FLC 93-404 at paragraphs 76-77 as follows:-

   It is important to recognise that the miscellany of “considerations” contained in ss 60CC(2) and (3) is no more than a means to an end. Self-evidently, they are only matters to be considered.  Of course, we accept they are of great importance, being the factors identified by Parliament as those the Court must take into account (when they are relevant).  However, they must be applied in a manner consistent with the overarching imperative of securing the outcome most likely to promote the child’s best interests.

   It needs also to be remembered that the importance of each s 60CC factor will vary from case to case…

   (Emphasis in original)

6. There is a presumption that it is in the child’s best interests for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility (s 61DA of the Act). The presumption relates to the allocation of parental responsibility. That presumption will not apply if there are reasonable grounds to believe that a parent has engaged in family violence or abuse of the child or where the Court is satisfied that it would not be in the child’s interests for the parent’s to have equal shared parental responsibility.

7. If there is an order for equal shared parental responsibility, the court is then obliged to consider whether it would be in the children’s best interests and reasonably practicable for them to spend equal time or substantial and significant time with each parent (s 65DAA of the Act).

Evidence

1. Findings are made on the balance of probabilities having regard to the evidence.  In applying that standard the Court must have regard to the nature and subject matter of the case and the gravity of the matters that are alleged (s 140 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)).

2. The matters relied upon the parties was extensive and their trial affidavits voluminous.  The mother, as a self-represented litigant sought to agitate every point.  It is not possible to refer to each and every matter in evidence and referenced in submissions in these reasons for judgment. I have read and heard the evidence and listened to the submissions. Although I may not have referred to a particular matter in evidence, it does not follow that I have not had regard to it.

3. In what follows statements of fact constitute findings of fact. In determining the matter I have had regard to all of the evidence and had the benefit of observing the appearance and the demeanour of the father, the mother and those witnesses who were required for cross-examination.  I have carefully considered the matter and in making findings to the requisite standard I have had regard to all of the evidence, the nature of the proceedings, the seriousness of the allegations and the consequences that flow from my findings.

The Issues

1. The principal issues for determination as identified in the parties’ affidavit material, the expert reports and during the course of the hearing, may be summarised as follows:-

   ·The allocation of parental responsibility;

   ·Whether the father poses a risk of physical or psychological harm to the child;

   ·Whether the father has acted protectively towards Y;

   ·Whether the mother has sought to influence Y’s attitudes and views towards the father;

   ·Whether the mother has the capacity to support the father having a meaningful relationship with Y;

   ·Y’s developmental needs and views.

The Hearing

1. As this is a parenting case, the Court must give effect to the principles enunciated in Division 12A of the Act. Section 69ZN of the Act sets out the principles for conducting child-related proceedings. Of particular relevance to these proceedings are:-

   ·The first principle which requires that the Court consider the needs of the child concerned and the impact that the conduct of the proceedings may have on the child in determining the conduct of the proceedings;

   ·The second principle, which requires the Court to actively direct, control and manage the conduct of the proceedings;

   ·The fifth principle, which provides that the proceedings should be conducted without undue delay and with as little formality, and legal technicality and form, as possible.

1. The mother represented herself throughout the proceedings, whilst the father was represented by counsel.  As a result, the application of those principles was at times difficult.  The mother had limited understanding of Court process and the relevant legal principles.  Those issues were compounded in circumstances where the mother is from Country Z and English is not her first language.  The mother had the assistance of a Country interpreter throughout the proceedings, although generally preferred to conduct her case without the assistance of that interpreter.  That approach meant that significant time was spent ensuring that the mother clearly understood the proceedings, both when she was giving her evidence and when she was cross-examining the father’s witnesses and the family report writer. 

2. As the mother was unrepresented, prior to the commencement of the hearing I informed the parties that in accordance with the provisions of the Act I must have regard to the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration. Further, I informed the parties that in determining what is in the best interests of the child, I would have regard to the considerations set out in s 60CC of the Act and I drew the parties’ attention to those provisions.

3. I informed the parties of the manner in which the trial was to proceed, the order of calling witnesses and the right which each party had to cross-examine the witnesses. 

4. The orders sought by the mother at the commencement of the hearing are set out at pages 31 to 36 of her Case Outline document filed 9 April 2018.  At paragraph 8 of the orders sought the mother seeks orders that the father establish a trust fund for Y’s education and at paragraph 9 she seeks orders to regulate how that fund is to be applied for Y’s benefit.  Further, at paragraph 11 of the orders sought the mother seeks that the father contribute to the cost of Y’s university education and at paragraph 23 she seeks that the father provide and maintain private health insurance for Y.

5. Prior to the commencement of the hearing I raised with the mother my concern that her application with respect to property and the financial support for Y was misconceived.  In particular, I drew the mother’s attention to the fact that final property orders had been made by the Family Court at Melbourne on 26 May 2006.  Having regard to those orders, I informed the mother that the Court had no jurisdiction to entertain a property application.  Further, the question of Y’s support is subject to the provisions of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) (“the Assessment Act”). There is no evidence before the Court of any current assessment or review of that assessment. Given those circumstances, I expressed concern that the Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the mother’s application with respect to Y’s financial support.

6. Notwithstanding my express concerns with respect to those aspects of the mother’s application, the mother sought to press those parts of her application during closing submissions.

7. The hearing was conducted over seven days.

Assessment of the mother’s evidence

1. As noted earlier, given the mother was representing herself she was afforded some latitude in the manner in which she presented her case.   

2. Much of the focus of her cross-examination of witnesses was directed towards historical matters, including allegations that she had been subjected to family violence at the hands of the father prior to the separation.  In so doing, the mother at times lost sight of the issues currently before the Court, particularly the evidence of Ms C as to Y’s relationship with both parents. 

3. Dr G, psychiatrist assessed the mother for the purposes of the proceedings.  His report dated 13 October 2016 is annexed to his affidavit filed 27 February 2017.  At page 10 of his report, Dr G observed the mother’s self-report of tendencies to orderliness and perfectionism.  Those reported tendencies were consistent with my own observations of the mother during the hearing.  Her trial affidavit material was detailed and meticulously prepared, as was her cross-examination of each witness. 

4. It was evident that the mother had devoted substantial time and energy to the preparation of her case.  As is clear from her Case Outline and trial affidavit, the mother sought to traverse many issues and events that predated the Final Orders.  On many occasions throughout the hearing I sought to re-direct the mother’s focus to more recent events, and certainly those that had occurred since the Final Orders were made.  Notwithstanding my attempts to shift the mother’s attention to matters of greater relevance and importance, those efforts were often to no avail.

5. As the trial progressed, it became increasingly clear that the mother’s negative view of the father and his conduct was fixed and unshakeable.    

6. I am satisfied that the father’s conduct and attitude towards the mother did little to assuage her concerns.  There were a series of events in the period leading up to the commencement of the proceedings that no doubt contributed to the mother’s apprehension as to the father’s capacity to act appropriately or protectively in his care of Y.  In particular, the father’s role in the death of Y’s dog, his leaving her unattended on occasions and his failure to monitor her exposure to on-line content together with his response to those events, was deeply concerning.  I will refer to those matters later in this judgment.

7. During her oral evidence the mother impressed as a truthful witness.  Her account of events upon which she relied was detailed and often she produced and tendered documents that supported her version of events.

8. However, the mother demonstrated little insight or awareness as to the depth of Y’s relationship with the father or the impact upon Y were that relationship to be significantly limited or severed.  The evidence of Ms C, family consultant as to the strength of the father’s relationship with Y and Y’s desire to spend time with him was compelling.  The mother exhibited little capacity to consider Ms C’s observations or assessment of Y’s relationship with the father.  The father’s contention is that the mother seeks to exclude him from Y’s life; having regard to her application and the manner in which she presented her case, I am satisfied there is much force in that submission.

9. Dr G noted the mother’s positon that Y should have extremely limited contact with the father.  At page 10 he reports that the mother acknowledged that Y “would be upset because she won’t be able to do what she likes at his place…but I can’t live like this, he tries to control everything”.

10. The mother’s reported concern as to the impact of the father’s behaviour upon her was a feature of her presentation throughout the course of the proceedings.  During her oral evidence the mother stated that she was pursuing the matter not only for Y but for herself as well, stating that she had suffered over the past 3 years.  Much of the mother’s focus throughout the trial with respect to the father’s behaviour was its impact upon her.  That the orders sought by her would impact Y and her relationship with the father appeared to be of little concern to her. 

Assessment of the father’s evidence

1. Notwithstanding the complaints of the father as to the mother’s attitude and capacity to support his relationship with Y, the focus of much of the evidence was upon the father’s conduct. It was alleged that the father had perpetrated family violence, that Y had been exposed to family violence, and further that he does not act protectively of Y when she is in his care.

2. The father was cross-examined by the mother and counsel for the ICL.  My impression of his evidence was that on occasions he was less than frank with the Court, particularly with respect to the circumstances of his withdrawal of Y from Suburb B School and the role he played in the death of Y’s dog.  The father’s evidence sought to minimise his role in both situations.  It was the father’s case that he withdrew Y from school because he could no longer afford to meet the private school fees. When asked questions as to his financial circumstances I found the father to be an evasive witness. 

3. Whilst on occasions the mother had a propensity to overstate her case, the father at times underplayed his role and responsibility with respect to those matters. Accordingly, the father’s evidence with respect to these matters must be viewed with caution.

4. Further, the father was cross-examined as to his care of Y.  The father views Y as a mature and capable girl who has the capacity to self-protect.  In my view, the father’s evidence with respect to Y’s capacity and his role to ensure her safety demonstrated his lack of insight as to Y’s needs and as to his responsibilities as a parent.

Evidence of Mr K

1. A cornerstone of the mother’s case is that the father has repeatedly left Y unsupervised or alternatively that he has left her in the care of strangers.  In particular, the mother alleges that when the father is working in his medical practice at country locales Y has been left unattended at motels or in the care of motel managers whilst he attends patients. The father rejects that contention.

2. In support of his case, the father relies upon the evidence of Mr K who swore an affidavit on 14 December 2017, that affidavit filed on 8 February 2018.  Mr K is a businessman.  In addition, he and his wife operate a bed-and-breakfast accommodation in Town O, New South Wales.  It is his evidence that the father and Y commenced staying at the bed-and-breakfast approximately eight years ago.  He deposes as to a number of occasions when Y and the father stayed at his bed-and-breakfast between 2011 and 2016. 

3. Mr K confirmed in his affidavit that there were occasions when Y was left in the care of his wife whilst the father worked.

4. The mother and counsel for the ICL cross-examined Mr K.

5. Mr K confirmed during his oral evidence that both he and his wife cared for Y during periods when the father attended to his work.  Mr K confirmed that during those periods Y had access to the gardens and a swimming pool at the property, that she spent her time playing games on her iPad, swimming in the pool and spending time in the home.

6. The mother challenged Ms K’s capacity to care for Y due to her ill-health, Mr K having confirmed that his wife suffers from rheumatoid arthritis, liver and heart conditions and lung disease.  Mr K confirmed that those conditions have developed over the past six to eight year period and that they did not impede Ms K’s ability to care for Y.

7. Mr K confirmed that he considers Mr Glazier to be a friend, albeit that Mr Glazier paid board for his stays at the bed-and-breakfast facility.  Further, Mr K confirmed that the father was not charged an additional fee for his wife’s care of Y during the father’s absences.  Rather, it was his evidence that he and Ms K enjoyed having Y stay with them at the property.

8. Mr K confirmed that over the period he witnessed the father with Y, he observed them to share a close relationship. Mr K observed that Y often laughed in her father’s company, that they talked together well, and that Y’s confidence and communication skills had grown over the period that she attended his home.  Mr K’s evidence as to the close relationship of the father and Y is consistent with the observations of Ms C.

9. Mr K impressed as a forthright and open witness, and I accept his evidence as to Y’s care arrangements during her stays at his home and as to his observations of Y’s relationship with the father.

Evidence of Ms J

1. Ms J is the father’s sister who at the time of the hearing was aged approximately 62 years and was a healthcare professional.  She resides with her husband in Suburb R.  Ms J swore an affidavit on 30 October 2017 in support of the father’s case.

2. Ms J deposed in her affidavit that she has had regular contact with the father and Y since Y’s birth.  She deposed that on occasions Y has stayed at her home during periods when the father has had to attend to his work commitments.

3. Ms J deposed that she observed Y to enjoy a loving relationship with the father and that she is a girl who enjoys family celebrations with other members of the extended family.  Further, she observed Y to be an active child who enjoys sports as well as being a child who enjoys using her iPad. 

4. Ms J was cross-examined by the mother with respect to her observations.

5. In particular, Ms J was asked questions in relation to her awareness of the June 2015 Orders and the father’s obligations thereunder. 

6. Ms J confirmed that she had not been provided with a copy of those orders and that she was unaware of the strict supervision requirements in relation to Y’s use of the internet, access to websites and use of video, computer and electronic games.

7. Ms J was also cross-examined with respect to statements in her affidavit regarding the mother and her attitude towards Ms J attending her home and the mother’s support or otherwise of Y’s participation in a sports activity.  During cross-examination, Ms J confirmed that the source of her information as to the mother’s attitude to her attendance at the mother’s home was the father; she was unaware of order 7 of the Final Orders which provides that changeover is to occur whenever possible at Y’s school and otherwise outside the milk bar at L Street, Suburb X.

8. I accept Ms J’s evidence that she was unaware of the orders in place that regulate the father’s time with Y, and otherwise impose obligations on the father to supervise the manner in which Y uses technology.  I also accept her evidence that she was unaware of the orders regulating changeovers of Y between the father and the mother.  The mother sought to infer that Ms J was an untruthful witness.  I do not accept that proposition.  Rather, it is my view that Ms J has simply accepted statements made to her by the father without question.  Accordingly, in my view, the fact that the father has failed to inform his sister, whom he entrusted with the care of Y, of his obligations under Court orders reflects poorly on him.  That evidence supports the mother’s contention that the father has paid scant regard to his obligations under orders of the Court. 

9. When questioned as to her opinion as to whether it was appropriate for Y to view “R-rated” movies such as “Fifty Shades of Grey” and “It”, Ms J was clear in her view that such material was inappropriate and that she would not permit her own children to view it.  I accept that evidence.

10. Ms J impressed as a truthful witness.  It was my impression that the unfavourable views expressed by her in relation to the mother were little more than a reflection of the attitudes and information provided to her by the father.

EXPERT WITNESSES

Dr G

1. As noted earlier, Dr G has prepared a psychiatric assessment of the mother.  Dr G was cross-examined by counsel for the father in respect of that assessment.  Dr G confirmed in his oral evidence that it was his view that the mother does not suffer from a psychiatric illness or personality disorder.  He noted that the mother self-reported her obsessive-compulsive personality traits that were characterised by tendencies toward orderliness and perfectionism. 

2. Counsel for the father sought Dr G’s opinion in relation to the mother’s reported anxiety and depression between November 2016 and January 2018.  When she attended upon Dr G in October 2016 the mother did not inform him that she was being treated for those symptoms.   

3. Counsel for the father referred Dr G to Exhibit F-1, being a bundle of medical certificates provided to Centrelink between November 2016 and 2018 which recorded a diagnosis of the mother with anxiety and depression.  Dr G confirmed that the mother could have developed those symptoms after attendance upon him and indeed noted that her attendance upon him may well have been a trigger for her symptoms.  He noted that individuals can become distressed after undergoing rigorous assessment with an independent examiner. 

4. Dr G was questioned as to the mother’s reported suicidal ideation which she experienced in 2015 following the intervention order proceedings.  Dr G noted that brief suicidal ideation following a traumatic event such as intervention order proceedings is common and confirmed that he was not particularly worried about that issue.  He confirmed that it was another of many symptoms of depression or acute adjustment disorder. 

5. As to his assessment of the mother Dr G confirmed that she presented as “someone typical of going through stressful family law matters”.  When questioned as to the mother’s tendency towards orderliness and perfectionism, Dr G confirmed that:-

   Yes, she might have been mildly obsessive-compulsive and therefore a perfectionist and want everything in order and, therefore, even more stressed when things weren’t going according to her plans or her wishes; but again, that’s just so common that it, in my opinion as a psychiatrist, doesn’t really bear a lot of consideration in terms of my role.

6. Dr G was also cross-examined as to the mother’s views that the father’s time with Y should be limited.  Dr G acknowledged that the mother’s views were at the extreme end of the spectrum.  Nonetheless, he was firm in his view that the mother does not have a psychiatric disorder.

7. As noted above Dr G is a consultant psychiatrist who has over three decades of experience in Australia and overseas.  There was no challenge to his qualifications or experience.

8. I accept his evidence in relation to his assessment of the mother’s functioning.  His prognosis for the mother, set out at page 10 of his report, is that the mother is not at any particular risk of future behavioural or psychiatric issues related to a psychiatric disorder.  In conclusion, he confirms that there is significant possibility that the mother has been traumatised by the father’s behaviours over a prolonged period.  Dr G noted that both the father and the mother may benefit from counselling to assist them in managing their behaviours.  There was no challenge to Dr G’s conclusions.

9. During the course of cross-examination, the father’s counsel sought Dr G’s opinion with respect to the mother’s medical records and records maintained by her treating psychologist. I raised with counsel my concern as to the purpose and relevance of the questions put. The approach by the father’s counsel was particularly concerning in circumstances where there is no challenge to the mother’s role in Y’s life; the father’s position is that Y should continue to live with the mother.  Notwithstanding my express concerns regarding the focus of the father’s cross-examination of Dr G, counsel for the father persisted in that line of inquiry; in my view that approach reflected poorly on the father.  In circumstances where it is conceded that Y has been well-cared for by the mother and the mother will continue to provide primary care to Y, there seemed little utility in pursuing cross-examination of the independent expert in relation to the mother’s historical medical records other than to demean and embarrass the mother.

Dr D

1. Dr D, consultant psychiatrist undertook a psychiatric assessment of the father.  That assessment is contained in his report dated 1 July 2016 annexed to his affidavit filed 16 March 2017.  Originally, Dr D had also been engaged to prepare a psychiatric assessment of the mother.  However, the mother failed to attend her scheduled appointment with him and as a result Dr D was only able to conduct an assessment of the father.

2. At page 7 of his report, Dr D provided the following summary of his assessment of the father:-

   [The father] was an unusual man.  He related with a mixture of jocular humour and at the same time, considerable frustration in respect to the allegations raised against him.  Whilst in the main he denied many of the allegations of [the mother], he did acknowledge that his judgement in regard to the care of [Y] had not been always optimal and could have compromised her safety. 

1. That the mother and the father do all acts and things as may be required to facilitate and maintain Y’s enrolment at Suburb B School. 

2. That the mother and father do all acts and things as may be required to permit Y to sit an entrance examinations for commencement in Grade 9 to selective entry government schools (including but not limited to N School) and full scholarship at private schools and in the event that she is offered a place at such school, do all such acts and things as may be required to facilitate her enrolment at that school.

3. That the mother and the father do all acts and things and sign all such documents as may be required to obtain an Australian passport for the child, and upon its issue such passport be held by the mother.

4. That the mother and the father sign all such documents as may be required to facilitate the child’s participation in any school authorised student exchange program in which the child elects to enrol in AND THE COURT NOTES that it is anticipated that the child may seek to participate in an exchange program to Country Z.

5. That forthwith the father do all such acts and things as may be required to install such child safety/ parental lock software as may be required for all devices to which the child has access when in his care to ensure that the child is not exposed to pornography, material which contains inappropriate sexual content or other content that is not age-appropriate.

6. That the father be and is hereby restrained by injunction from distributing, disseminating, publishing or otherwise making available photographs of Y to any person or persons, other than immediate family members via any form of social media and/or dating website.

7. That the father and the mother be and are hereby restrained by themselves, their servants or agents from:-

   (a)Abusing, insulting, belittling, rebuking or otherwise denigrating the other;

   (b)Discussing these proceedings with or in the presence or hearing of the child and from permitting any other person to do so.

8. That the mother and the father do all such acts and things as may be required to facilitate the child’s attendance upon the Independent Children’s Lawyer for the purpose of having the Independent Children’s Lawyer explain these orders to her.

9. That the appointment of the Independent Children’s Lawyer be discharged on 24 June 2019.

10. That all extant applications be otherwise dismissed.

11. That pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B, the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these orders and details of who can assist parties adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

    AND THE COURT NOTES that the father has agreed to pay the following expenses in relation to Y:-

    (a)Enrolment fees, insurance and equipment, coaching and training fees and competition fees to enable the child’s attendance at and membership in a sports activity;

    (b)One half of tuition fees, school authorised extra-curricular expenses for the child’s attendance at Suburb B School, any select entry public high school that she attends;

    (c)One half of the costs associated with the child’s student exchange travel to Country Z.

    (d)All costs associated with the child’s participation in her sports activity, including but not limited to training and competition fees, equipment expenses, enrolment and insurances.

I certify that the preceding three hundred and forty (340) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Johns delivered on 22 May 2019.

Associate: 

Date:  22 May 2019