Marsden and Winch (No. 2)

[2007] FamCA 1003

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MARSDEN AND WINCH (NO. 2) [2007] FamCA 1003

FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN – Application sought by father to change contact supervisors because of their inability to provide supervision pending the determination of an appeal against the trial Judge’s orders preventing the child from spending any time with the father  – these final orders were stayed on 22 November 2006 enabling the resumption of time being spent between the father and the child – father had brought an earlier application seeking the same orders to change contact supervisors because of their alleged inability to facilitate time spent with the father and child in January 2007 – in both cases there was insufficient evidence provided to support such a proposition – application dismissed – mother’s application to discharge orders enabling the father to spend time with the child also dismissed – father to pay two-thirds of mother’s costs

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Rice v Asplund (1979) FLC ¶90-725
Sedgley v Sedgley (1995) FLC ¶92-623

APPLICANT: Mr Marsden

RESPONDENT: Ms Winch

FILE NUMBER: CAF 65 of 2004

DATE DELIVERED: 21 August 2007

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Faulks DCJ

HEARING DATE: 20 August 2007

REPRESENTATION

Mr Marsden appeared on his own behalf

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Nash

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Eley

Orders

1. Mr Marsden’s application filed on 17 July 2007 is dismissed.

2. Ms Winch’s response and the orders sought in relation thereto filed on 9 August 2007 are dismissed.

3. It is ordered that Mr Marsden pay two-thirds of the costs of Ms Winch as assessed or agreed.

4. The matter is removed from the pending cases inventory.

5. Any material produced subpoena which became an exhibit will be retuned by the Court at the expiration of the appeal period to the person producing it, any material produced by a party which became the subject of an exhibit will be returned by the Court to the party at the expiration of the appeal period.

IT IS NOTED IN CONNECTION WITH THESE ORDERS that the judgment of the Honourable Justice Faulks delivered this day will for all publication and reporting purposes be referred to as Marsden v Winch

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: CAF 65 of 2004

Mr Marsden

Applicant

And

Ms Winch

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. There were orders made of an interim nature on 23 May 2006 which restrain the father from doing certain things, including making gifts to [S] who is the child the subject of these proceedings, and that restraining order included photographs.  I mention this only by way of introduction to the rest of the proceedings.  Those were interim orders pending a final hearing which resulted in primary orders being made on 4 August 2006 which were corrected under the slip rule on 30 October 2006.  Those orders provided, in effect, that while the child would live with her mother she would not spend any time with her father at all, and Order 4 made on that day…