Parsons & Anor and Masson - [2017] FamCA 1148

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PARSONS AND ANOR & MASSON

[2017] FamCA 1148

FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Stay – Where the applicant mothers applied for a stay of orders made 3 October 2017 [as amended on 30 November 2017] – Where orders were made in relation to Christmas 2017 and term time commencing in 2018 – Where a successful appeal would permit international relocation and reduce time with the respondent – Where the granting of a stay would not render the appeal nugatory or pointless – Concluded that having constant changes in the arrangements for the children may not be in the children’s best interests – Concluded that if the appeal is successful it may be the children’s last opportunity to spend Christmas in Australia with the respondent father – Ordered that the provision for Christmas holiday time with the respondent father is not suspended – Ordered that until further order the increase in term time arrangements with the respondent father be suspended and the current time arrangements are to continue.

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) r 22.11

JRN & KEN v IEG & BLG (1998) 72 ALJR 1329
Clemett & Clemett 1981 FLC 91-013

APPLICANTS:

Susan Parsons & Margaret Parson

RESPONDENT:

Robert Masson

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Legal Aid NSW

FILE NUMBER:

SYC

3963

2015

DATE DELIVERED:

18 December 2017

PLACE DELIVERED:

Newcastle

PLACE HEARD:

Newcastle

JUDGMENT OF:

Cleary J

HEARING DATE:

18 December 2017

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANTS:

Ms McMahon

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANTS:

McDonald Johnson

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Ms Lawson

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Steiner Legal

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Ms O’Rourke

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Legal Aid NSW

Orders

The operation of Order 10.2 made on 3 October 2017 [as amended on 30 November 2017] is suspended until further order.
The operation of Order 10.1 made on 3 October 2017 [as amended on 30 November 2017] continues until further order.
The Application in a Case filed 31 October 2017 is otherwise dismissed.

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 Parsons and Anor & Masson 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 NEWCASTLE

FILE NUMBER: SYC3963/2015

Susan Parsons & Margaret Parsons

Applicants

And

Robert Masson

Respondent

And

Independent Children’s Lawyer

EX-TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

This is an application by Susan Parsons and Margaret Parsons for a stay of orders made in this Court on 3 October 2017. I will refer to the applicants as Susan and Margaret for the same reasons as…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Parsons & Anor and Masson and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2017] FamCA 1148
Decision Date: 18 December 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Parsons & Anor v Masson*, heard by Cleary J, the applicants sought to suspend the operation of certain orders made on 3 October 2017, as amended on 30 November 2017. The precise nature of the underlying dispute is not detailed in the provided text, but the application concerned the continuation or suspension of these existing court orders.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant the applicants' request to suspend the operation of Order 10.2, while allowing Order 10.1 to continue. This required the court to consider the merits of suspending one specific order while maintaining another, presumably in light of the circumstances presented by the parties.

Cleary J's reasoning and the legal principles applied are not explicitly set out in the provided text. However, the orders indicate a decision was made regarding the continuation and suspension of the previously made orders. The court ultimately ordered that the operation of Order 10.2 be suspended until further order, while Order 10.1 would continue in effect until further order. The applicants' broader application was otherwise dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

The operation of Order 10.2 made on 3 October 2017 [as amended on 30 November 2017] is suspended until further order.

The operation of Order 10.1 made on 3 October 2017 [as amended on 30 November 2017] continues until further order.

The Application in a Case filed 31 October 2017 is otherwise dismissed.

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.