Moose & Moose

In the appeal, the father sought to overturn the orders of the trial judge that the children should live with their mother and spend supervised time with him. The trial judge had made these orders following a parenting application by the father. The Full Court was required to determine whether the trial judge had given proper consideration to the matters set out in s 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) when making the final orders. The court was also required to consider whether the trial judge had given adequate reasons for accepting or rejecting the father’s proposals. The Full Court had to assess whether the trial judge had erred in his application of the Russell and Close principle and whether the trial judge had failed to treat the matter as one where there had been no significant or substantial change since the consent orders were made.

The Full Court held that the trial judge had not given proper consideration to the s 60CC matters. The Full Court held that the trial judge had failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting the father’s proposals. The Full Court held that the trial judge had erred in his application of the Russell and Close principle. The Full Court held that the trial judge had failed to treat the matter as one where there had been no significant or substantial change since the consent orders were made. The Full Court held that the indefinite supervised order was inappropriate.

The Full Court allowed the appeal and set aside the orders of the trial judge. The Full Court ordered that the matter be listed before a Judge at first instance as soon as possible to determine any application for interim parenting orders or other procedural directions necessary for a re-hearing of the parenting applications. The Full Court ordered that the costs incurred by the father, the mother, and the Independent Children’s Lawyer in relation to the appeal and the re-hearing be certified under the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth).