Palmer & Palmer (No 3)
[2022] FedCFamC1F 577
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia
(DIVISION 1)
Palmer & Palmer (No 3) [2022] FedCFamC1F 577
File number: CAC 617 of 2021 Judgment of: GILL J Date of judgment: 9 August 2022 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where extensive evidence at a final hearing raises live issues regarding risk of neglect and abuse by parents of six children – Where the Minister for Families, Communities and Disability Services, NSW, is granted sole parental responsibility of five of the six children on an interim basis – Where the father has parental responsibility of the one remaining child pursuant to a child welfare order from the NSW Children’s Court – Where the Secretary seeks to discharge the order pertaining to that one child – Where it is ordered that the same orders for the five children will apply to that one child, following the ceasing of the NSW Children’s Court order. Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 9 Date of hearing: 1–9 August 2022 Place: Wagga Wagga Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Masters Solicitor for the Applicant: KPW Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Bateman Solicitor for the Respondent: Inner West Solicitors Pty Ltd Counsel for the Intervener: Mr Moore Solicitor for the Intervener: Crown Solicitor’s Office Counsel for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Mr Stagg Solicitor for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Legal Aid NSW ORDERS
CAC 617 of 2021 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR PALMER
Applicant
AND: MS PALMER
Respondent
SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITIES AND JUSTICE
Intervener
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER
order made by:
GILL J
DATE OF ORDER:
9 AUGUST 2022
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.I discharge all previous orders for the allocation of parental responsibilities for any of the children.
2.I discharge any orders that provide for any of the children to spend time with a person.
IT IS ORDERED, UNTIL FURTHER ORDER, THAT:
3.The Minister for Families, Communities and Disability Services New South Wales (“the Minister”) has sole parental responsibility for X, born in 2008, Y, born in 2010, W, born in 2011, V, born in 2012 and Z, born in 2013, with such parental responsibility to include, but not be limited to:
(a)where and with whom each child shall live;
(b)what therapy or medical intervention will take place for each child; and
(c)each child's attendance at school.
4.On Q, born in 2012, ceasing to be under the care of a person pursuant to a child welfare law, I direct that the Minister for Families, Communities and Disability Services New South Wales has sole parental responsibility for Q, including but not limited to:
(a)where and with whom Q shall live;
(b)what therapy or medical intervention will take place for Q; and
(c)Q’s attendance at school.
5.I make no order for the children to spend time with either the mother or the father.
6.The proceedings are adjourned until the delivery of judgment or further listing by any party.
7.The Minister is at liberty to seek a relisting of this matter following the commencement or finalisation of proceedings in the Children’s Court of New South Wales.
8.The order that there is no order for the children to spend time with a parent does not restrict the Minister from placing any child to live with, or arranging for any child to spend time with, a parent.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Palmer & Palmer is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX-TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
GILL J:
In these proceedings, which have taken place over a period of seven days, extensive evidence has been taken from each of the parents, from persons associated with the parents, from an expert witness in the form of a Court Children’s Expert and from two Departmental officers (from the New South Wales Department of Communities and Justice (“the Department”)) and an officer of an organisation that is engaged by the Department for the purpose of casework.
The material before the Court canvasses an extensive period of time and circumstances where the Department has previously made application to the New South Wales Children’s Court that has resulted in a number of the children of the relationship between the parents being permanently removed.
The current proceedings involve the children that remain in each of the parents’ care. During the final hearing of the matter, a number of issues have been raised on the evidence as to each of the children being at risk of harm from neglect, to the lesser issue of each of the children being at risk of exposure to harm from abuse.
Prior to making a final determination as to the facts of this case, on a fuller consideration of the evidence, or coming to a discretionary conclusion as to the appropriate orders, it is appropriate that temporary orders be put into place pending the delivery of judgment in order to protect the children from these, as yet, unresolved risks.
The appropriate mechanism to do so is to invest the Secretary of the Department with parental responsibility, including as to where and with whom the children will live, as to the medical and therapeutic interventions for the children and as to their education.
The Secretary indicates that there will be intensive case management but at present the children will, under the exercise of parental responsibility by the Secretary, remain living with the parents. The Secretary would, pursuant to these orders, be at liberty to move the children through the use of that parental responsibility should the risks to the children accelerate pending the delivery of judgment.
It is appropriate that orders be put in place to give the parental responsibility to the Secretary to protect the children at present.
An issue arises in respect of the jurisdiction of this Court to make orders in respect of Q (“Q”), as she is currently the subject of a final New South Wales Children’s Court order which invests the father with parental responsibility and the Secretary with an obligation to supervise until approximately October this year. By virtue of those orders, Q is under the care of a person pursuant to child welfare law. The Secretary has indicated that the Secretary will promptly make an application to the Children’s Court, which will be supported by the father and neither consented to nor opposed by the mother, seeking a discharge of those orders such that this Court will be at liberty to exercise the jurisdiction in respect of Q.
Accordingly, similar orders as for the other children will be made for Q, save that insofar as the orders apply to Q, they will be expressed to only come into effect when Q ceases to be under the care of those orders, pursuant to a child welfare law.
I certify that the preceding nine (9) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Gill. Associate:
Dated: 9 August 2022
0
0
0