MANNING & PEARSON
Case
•
[2015] FCCA 90
•29 January 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
MANNING & PEARSON [2015] FCCA 90
[2015] FCCA 90
29 January 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal from orders made by the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia, brought before Judge Roberts. The dispute involved Mr. Manning (the father) and Ms. Pearson (the mother) regarding parenting arrangements for their child, [X], born in 2003. The proceedings also touched upon the payment of school fees and medical expenses, and the circumstances under which the child should travel unaccompanied.
The court was required to determine the appropriate orders for equal shared parental responsibility, the child's living arrangements, and the specific communication and time arrangements between the child and each parent. Further issues included the arrangements for the child's air travel, including who should be responsible for booking and paying for airfares, and the conditions under which unaccompanied travel would be permitted, particularly in light of the child's diagnoses of Asperger's and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders. The court also considered provisions for school enrolment changes and the notification of medical appointments and treatments.
Judge Roberts discharged the previous orders of the Federal Magistrates Court and made new orders establishing equal shared parental responsibility, with the child to live with the mother. The orders detailed a comprehensive schedule for the child to communicate and spend time with the father, including specific provisions for school holidays and long weekends. Crucially, the court addressed the practicalities of air travel, stipulating that the mother would book and pay for airfares for certain periods of the father's time, while the father would do so for other periods. Unaccompanied travel was permitted after the child's 12th birthday, with a liberty to apply if a paediatrician advised against it. The orders also included provisions for notification of school changes, medical appointments, administration of medication, and a restraint on denigrating the other parent.
The court was required to determine the appropriate orders for equal shared parental responsibility, the child's living arrangements, and the specific communication and time arrangements between the child and each parent. Further issues included the arrangements for the child's air travel, including who should be responsible for booking and paying for airfares, and the conditions under which unaccompanied travel would be permitted, particularly in light of the child's diagnoses of Asperger's and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders. The court also considered provisions for school enrolment changes and the notification of medical appointments and treatments.
Judge Roberts discharged the previous orders of the Federal Magistrates Court and made new orders establishing equal shared parental responsibility, with the child to live with the mother. The orders detailed a comprehensive schedule for the child to communicate and spend time with the father, including specific provisions for school holidays and long weekends. Crucially, the court addressed the practicalities of air travel, stipulating that the mother would book and pay for airfares for certain periods of the father's time, while the father would do so for other periods. Unaccompanied travel was permitted after the child's 12th birthday, with a liberty to apply if a paediatrician advised against it. The orders also included provisions for notification of school changes, medical appointments, administration of medication, and a restraint on denigrating the other parent.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Appeal
-
Remedies
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
MANNING & PEARSON [2015] FCCA 90
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
4
F & S
[2003] FMCAfam 531
Runcorne & Raine
[2008] FamCA 837
MRR v GR
[2010] HCA 4