MAHONEY & DIETER

[2018] FamCA 532

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MAHONEY & DIETER [2018] FamCA 532

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Rice & Asplund threshold issue – Where final parenting orders were made by the Family Court Division of the District Court of New Zealand in 2017 – Where those orders provide for the child to live with the father in Australia, spend supervised time with mother in New Zealand, and communicate with the mother via Skype – Where the mother filed an Initiating Application seeking discharge of the New Zealand orders and fresh parenting orders that provide for the child to live with her in New Zealand – Where the father sought dismissal of the Initiating Application due to there being no material change to warrant revision of the orders – Where the mother’s evidence made no tangible difference to the findings made by the New Zealand court – Where the mother failed to demonstrate any material change in circumstances – Ordered mother’s Initiating Application be dismissed with no order as to costs.

Care of Children Act 2004 (NZ)
Family Courts Act 1980 (NZ)
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) rr 14.42(c), 15.51, 15.41 and 15.52

Langmeil & Grange [2013] FamCAFC 31
Marsden & Winch (2009) 42 Fam LR 1
Miller & Harrington (2008) FLC 93-383
Rice & Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725
SPS & PLS (2008) FLC 93-363

APPLICANT: Ms Mahoney

RESPONDENT: Mr Dieter

FILE NUMBER: MLC 11835 of 2017

DATE DELIVERED: 27 June 2018

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Austin J

HEARING DATE: 27 June 2018

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Not Applicable

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Not Applicable

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms Harris

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Melbourne Family Lawyers

Orders

1. The mother’s Initiating Application filed on 14 November 2017 is dismissed.

2. No order as to costs.

3. Any and all other outstanding applications are dismissed.

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 Mahoney & Dieter 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 11835 of 2017

Ms Mahoney

Applicant

And

Mr Dieter

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. In 2017, parenting orders were made between the applicant mother and respondent father in respect of their only child by the Family Court Division of the District Court of New Zealand. The orders were made on 7 April 2017, but sealed on 11 April 2017. 

2. Relevantly, the orders provided for the child (who was then just short of six years of age) to live…