Morrissey and Morrissey (No. 3)

[2008] FamCA 828

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MORRISSEY & MORRISSEY (NO. 3) [2008] FamCA 828

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Morrissey

RESPONDENT: Ms Morrissey

FILE NUMBER: DGC 3488 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 29 September 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 29 September 2008

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms B.M. Phelan

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Perry Weston

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms J Walters

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Lampe Family Lawyers

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER COUNSEL Ms J.S. Elleray

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER Hardys

Orders

1. That the final hearing remain fixed for 19 January 2009.

2. That paragraph 17 of the orders made on 28 August 2008 be discharged.

3. That my reasons for judgment this day be transcribed and be made available to the parties along with the reasons for judgment of 28 August.

4. That the supervision order of the Children’s Court at Melbourne be marked as Exhibit H1 and remain on the court file.

5. That paragraph 10 of the orders made on 28 August 2008 relating to the filing of material be extended to 9 January 2009.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Morrissey & Morrissey is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER:  DGC 3488 of 2007

MR MORRISSEY

Applicant

And

MS MORRISSEY

Respondent

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is a matter that was adjourned today by me from 28 August.  On that day there were some problems about whether or not the father should be confident that the previous orders, the time to be spent with the youngest of the children, would be complied with.  That problem has now gone away on the basis that the father has the child for the purposes of the contact.

2. A number of other problems have now been dealt with pending the matter being listed for final hearing in 2009.  One of the orders that I made on 28 August was that the husband do all things necessary to ensure that J was not left in the sole care of Ms B.  That concern arose out of some comments made by an expert witness.  I have now had the opportunity to read a supervision order made by the Children's Court at Melbourne in relation to the child of Ms B.  A supervision order was made for a period of 12 months to expire on 1 July 2009.  It is a condition of the order that the mother of that child accept visits from and cooperate with the department and accepts support services as agreed.

3. Ms Walters quite correctly points out that the department is still interested in and concerned about the child, but the supervision order gives them a very significant role in the family's life, notwithstanding that J is not anything to do with that order.  On the basis that the department will continue to have an ongoing role I do not see any necessity now for paragraph 17 of the orders that I made on 28 August to continue, and on that basis I propose to discharge that paragraph of the order.

4. I propose to order also that the supervision order be marked as an exhibit.  I will mark that as exhibit H1 and I will direct that it remain on the court file.  I will also make orders that the court follow up with the subpoenaed material from Brisbane and that the transcript be made available of today's proceedings, as well as those of 28 August, as soon as possible.  The other order I will make is that paragraph 10, which had time limits for the filing of the expert witness material by the independent children's lawyer, be extended to 9 January 2009.

I certify that the preceding Four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin

Associate: …

Date:  14 October 2008