Millhouse and Husserl - [2017] FamCA 1112

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MILLHOUSE & HUSSERL

[2017] FamCA 1112

FAMILY LAW – CHILD ABUSE – Request for intervention – Where the Department of Family and Community Services is requested to intervene in the proceedings.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 91B

Tallant & Kelsey [2017] FamCA 210

APPLICANT:

Ms Millhouse

RESPONDENT:

Mr Husserl

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Mr Walkden

FILE NUMBER:

PAC

3726

2017

DATE DELIVERED:

12 December 2017

PLACE DELIVERED:

Parramatta

PLACE HEARD:

Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF:

Hannam J

HEARING DATE:

12 December 2017

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

Kim Bolas Legal Group

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Bowral Legal

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Legal Aid NSW Campbelltown Family Law

Orders

Pursuant to Section 91B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the Secretary of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services is requested to intervene in these proceedings.
In the event that the Secretary intervenes, he/she is to file and serve a Notice of Intervention as soon as practicable.
Pursuant to Rule 24.13 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth), leave is granted to the Secretary of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services, or his/her delegate, to inspect and copy any documents on the Court file forming part of the Court record.

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 Millhouse & Husserl 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 PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: PAC 3726 of 2017

Ms Millhouse

Applicant

And

Mr Husserl

Respondent

And

Independent Children’s Lawyer

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

On 12 December 2017 I made orders that the Secretary of the Department of Family and Community Services (“the Secretary”) be invited to intervene in parenting proceedings involving the parties two children.
I indicated that I would publish my reasons for the invitation to the Secretary to intervene in these proceedings at a later date. These are those reasons.
In summary I am of the view that having regard to the evidence filed in this court and documents produced on subpoena that the court may find that there is an unacceptable risk of harm to the children in the care of each of the parents. For this reason the Secretary has been invited to intervene.
The Secretary is requested to treat the information in these reasons as new information against which to assess the current circumstances of the children and whether it is appropriate to intervene in the family law proceedings before this court.

Background

The parenting proceedings before this court relate to the two…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Millhouse and Husserl

Details

AGLC: Millhouse and Husserl [2017] FamCA 1112
Case: [2017] FamCA 1112
Decision Date: 12 December 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Millhouse and Husserl*, heard before Hannam J, the proceedings concerned an application for the Secretary of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services to intervene. The precise nature of the underlying dispute between Millhouse and Husserl is not detailed in the provided text, but the application for intervention suggests it involves matters within the jurisdiction of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

The central legal issue before the Court was whether to grant leave for the Secretary of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services to intervene in the proceedings and to inspect and copy documents on the court file. This required the Court to consider the provisions of Section 91B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and Rule 24.13 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

Hannam J ordered that the Secretary of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services be requested to intervene in the proceedings pursuant to Section 91B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The Court further ordered that, should the Secretary intervene, a Notice of Intervention was to be filed and served as soon as practicable. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 24.13 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth), leave was granted to the Secretary, or their delegate, to inspect and copy any documents forming part of the court record.

Orders

Orders of the court

Pursuant to Section 91B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the Secretary of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services is requested to intervene in these proceedings.

In the event that the Secretary intervenes, he/she is to file and serve a Notice of Intervention as soon as practicable.

Pursuant to Rule 24.13 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth), leave is granted to the Secretary of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services, or his/her delegate, to inspect and copy any documents on the Court file forming part of the Court record.

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

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.