Narris and O’Dell

[2018] FCCA 1344

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NARRIS & O’DELL [2018] FCCA 1344

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Child aged 4 years and 10 months – parties had brief relationship and separated prior to child’s birth – child has lived in the predominant care of the mother since birth – child has special needs – consent order of November 2014 envisages parents sharing parental responsibility for the child – parties unable to agree which pre-school child should attend – best interests.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975, ss.60B, 60CC, 65DAC, 117(2)

Cases cited:
B v B: Family Law Reform Act 1995 (1997) FLC 92-755
Russell & Russell & Anor [2009] FamCA 28

Applicant: MR NARRIS

Respondent: MS O’DELL

File Number: ADC 4402 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Brown

Hearing date: 17 May 2018

Date of Last Submission: 17 May 2018

Delivered at: Adelaide

Delivered on: 25 May 2018

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: In person

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Charman

Solicitors for the Respondent: Ian Charman & Associates

ORDERS

1. That the applicant father’s Initiating Application filed on 23 February 2018 is hereby dismissed.

2. That the parties do all things necessary to maintain the enrolment of the child [X] born on 2013 at the Suburb A Children's Centre.

3. That the said child shall attend the Suburb A Primary School as and from Term 1 2019 or such other school as advised by the Suburb A Children's Centre Director, the said school and therapists and that the parties do all things necessary to facilitate this order including the signing of all necessary documents.

4. That liberty is granted to the respondent mother to apply to relist on the issue of costs within twenty-one (21) days.

5. That the proceedings be otherwise dismissed.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT ADELAIDE

ADC 4402 of 2013

MR NARRIS

Applicant

And

MS O’DELL

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. Mr Narris “the father” and Ms O'Dell “the mother” are the parents of [X] born 2013.  On 28 March 2017, a team[1] comprised of a clinical psychologist; a speech pathologist; a physiotherapist; an occupational therapist; and a paediatrician; concluded that [X] has global development delay and meets the criteria for a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. 

   [1]  Hereinafter referred to as the CAT Team or the Team

2. As a consequence of this diagnosis, the Team indicated that [X] would benefit from ongoing early intervention and support.  In this context, [X]’s parents are unable to agree in respect of which preschool [X] should attend for at least the next 12 months or so. 

3. The father favours the (omitted)  which is based in Suburb C.  It provides early intervention for children with autism, who are aged between two and six years of age.  It is a private centre, which costs approximately $300.00 per fortnight.

4. The mother favours the preschool at which [X] is currently enrolled and which he…