Lorde and Chu

[2018] FamCA 121

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

LORDE & CHU [2018] FamCA 121

FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Contravention – Adjournment – Appointment of ICL

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Lorde

RESPONDENT: Ms Chu

FILE NUMBER: CAC 478 of 2012

DATE DELIVERED: 1 February 2018

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Gill J

HEARING DATE: 1 February 2018

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Self-representing

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Self-representing

Orders

1. These proceedings are adjourned for directions on 19 March 2018 at 10am.

2. Pursuant to s 68L of the Family Law Act 1975 an Independent Children’s Lawyer be appointed for R, born … 2008, and C, born … 2012, and the Legal Aid Commission of the Australian Capital Territory is requested to provide such representation.

3. It is noted that Ms Lloyd has previously been the Independent Children’s Lawyer in this matter.

4. The parties are to provide to the Canberra office of the Legal Aid Commission of the Australian Capital Territory at … forthwith copies of all documents thus far filed by them in these proceedings.

5. Leave is granted to the Independent Children’s Lawyer to issue such subpoena as they consider relevant to the issues before the Court.

6. Leave is granted to the Independent Children’s Lawyer to have photocopy access to all documents produced on subpoena in these proceedings.

7. Leave is granted to the Independent Children’s Lawyer to re-list the matter on short notice by communication with the Court in Chambers in appropriate circumstances.

8. I suspend Order six of the orders of 20 March 2017 for Mr Lorde to spend time with his children, until further order.

9. I grant leave to the parties to seek an urgent relisting of this matter on 48 hours’ notice to each other, particularly in the event that the bail terms are changed so as not to frustrate the operation of orders for Mr Lorde to spend time with his children.  On such relisting the parties may anticipate that the application for suspension of the orders made by Ms Chu and the application for enforcement of the orders made by Mr Lorde may be heard at short notice. 

IT IS NOTED THAT

1. Mr Lorde’s current bail conditions prevent him from contacting or approaching within 100 metres of Ms Chu I direct that in the event that Mr Lorde files documents for the relisting of this matter that he is excused from the service of those documents upon Ms Chu and the Registry of the Family Court of Australia at Canberra will arrange for the provision of those documents to Ms Chu. 

2. Ms Chu has provided to the Court her journal entries of the incidents that she says have been reported to her by the children and note earlier orders made that such documents are to be retained in an envelope on the Court file to be accessed by legal practitioners for the parties, or by the Independent Children’s Lawyer.

3. Ms Chu will email to the Court immediately at the close of these proceedings a video file in relation to the allegations of abuse of the children, that such video file may be retained on the Court file for the same purpose.

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 Lorde & Chu 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 CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: CAC 478  of 2012

Mr Lorde

Applicant

And

Ms Chu

Respondent

EX-TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These proceedings were listed today for the purpose of dealing with the sanction component of contravention proceedings previously brought by Mr Lorde against Ms Chu.  Those contravention proceedings had resulted in eight findings of contravention without reasonable excuse and the proceedings had been adjourned to December 2017 and then adjourned until today. 

2. Prior to the previous mention of the matter in December further contravention proceedings had been filed by Mr Lorde and on 30 January 2018 further contraventions again were filed by Mr Lorde.  Those matters were each listed for today. 

3. The earlier set of matters filed by Mr Lorde were listed today for hearing. 

4. In the meantime, Ms Chu filed an application, along with a Notice of Risk of Abuse, seeking the suspension of the orders and seeking that any time that Mr Lorde spends with the children be supervised and seeking permission to travel overseas.  Today it became apparent that those documents were not served upon Mr Lorde, that is, he had no notice of those proceedings until he attended at Court today.  The documents were presented to Mr Lorde today and he indicated that it was unfair for him to deal with those matters on the run.  Those matters encompassed allegations that he had struck C with a stick, with a baseball glove and had struck R with a baseball.  I accept that it would be completely unfair for Mr Lorde to deal with those matters without notice. 

5. Further, it became apparent today that Mr Lorde has been charged in relation to some matters involving his children, although the details of those are not yet apparent to the Court.  Exhibit C1 is a bail undertaking indicating that Mr Lorde is due to appear in court next on that matter in the ACT Magistrates Court on 6 August 2018.  It is not clear at present whether that date is for the hearing of the matter (Mr Lorde believes it to be so) or is for some case management process.  The bail conditions attached to whatever the charges are mean that Mr Lorde is unable to contact or approach within hundred metres of Ms Chu, nor C, nor R, nor their home, nor their school.  The presence of these bail conditions mean that notwithstanding whatever Family Court orders are in place for Mr Lorde to spend time with his children he is unable to do so.

6. Today the Duty Lawyer, Ms G of the ACT Legal Aid Office, has attended the Court at the request of the Court.  She has agreed to provide some assistance to the parties should they apply for Legal Aid.  It is being recommended to each of the parties that it is very much in their interests that they obtain legal representation in this matter due to the complexities of the contravention proceedings, the suspension proceedings and the proceedings in the Magistrates Court in relation to the charges against Mr Lorde.  It should be noted that Ms G’ attendance today involved an interruption to her duty work.  It is to the credit of Ms G and the Legal Aid Commission that they have made themselves available for this purpose at short notice.

7. Given that the bail conditions mean that the orders for Mr Lorde to spend time with the children cannot have any practical effect it is appropriate at this stage that the orders for him to spend time with the children be suspended, until further order, on the proviso that Mr Lorde is able to bring the matter back before the Court on short notice should those bail terms be changed such that they will not defeat the operation of Court orders.  That would then mean at short notice his application for contravention proceedings insofar as the matters awaiting sanction could be dealt with along with any further necessary orders to implement the Family Court orders or to further suspend them on Ms Chu’s application could be determined.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Gill delivered on 1 February 2018.

Associate: 

Date:  1 February 2018