FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Paulson & Castro [2024] FedCFamC2F 361
File number(s): BRC 4120 of 2014 Judgment of: JUDGE DICKSON Date of judgment: 27 March 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Costs – Parenting – Where it was alleged the father contravened by overholding the child following periods of time spending – Where the father admitted the breaches at the commencement of Trial but maintained he had a reasonable excuse – Where after giving evidence at Trial, the father plead guilty to each count without reasonable excuse – Father to enter into a Bond – Orders for costs. Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 70NAE, 70NEB, 70NEC, 102NA, 117.
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) sch 1.
Cases cited: Keehan & Keehan [2019] FamCAFC 250
In the Marriage of Kohan (1992) 16 Fam LR 254
McClintock & Levier [2009] FamCAFC 62
Millson & Halbert [2021] FedCFamC1F 94
Rice v Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725.
Division: Division 2 Family Law Number of paragraphs: 57 Date of hearing: 21 February 2024 and 19 March 2024 Place: Adelaide Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Frazelle Solicitor for the Applicant: Keyworth Harris & Lowe Family Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Hanlon Solicitor for the Respondent: A P Hodgson & Associates ORDERS
BRC 4120 of 2014 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: MS PAULSON
Applicant
AND: MR CASTRO
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE DICKSON
DATE OF ORDER:
27 MARCH 2024
UPON NOTING:
A.That the respondent father admits that he has contravened without reasonable excuse the following parenting orders made 14 October 2016:
(a)3 October 2021, order 16(a);
(b)5 January 2022, order 16(c);
(c)1 May 2022. order 14;
(d)20 September 2022, orders 16(a) and 16(b);
(e)30 October 2022, order 14;
(f)13 November 2022, order 14;
(g)17 November 2022, order 15; and
(h)27 November 2022, order 14.
B.That the contraventions were less serious contraventions within the meaning of subdivision E of Division 13A of Part VII of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to section 70NEB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (‘the Act’) the father is required to enter into a Bond pursuant to section 70NEC of the Act for a period of 12 months from the day upon which the father enters into the Bond upon condition that the father complies with all parenting orders made and to be made under the Act.
2.The father do attend at the Brisbane Registry of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia in person on 28 March 2024 at 2:30pm (Queensland Time) to receive an explanation in relation to the Bond referred to in Order 1 as required by section 70NEC(5) and to sign the Bond in the presence of Judicial Registrar of the Court.
3.Pursuant to section 70NEB(1)(f) of the Act, the father do pay the mother’s costs of and incidental to the mother’s Application for Contravention (Amended) in the sum of…
Continue reading Paulson & Castro
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Paulson & Castro [2024] FedCFamC2F 361
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC2F 361
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether Mr. Castro had contravened the parenting orders and, if so, what the appropriate remedy should be. The court had to determine whether the contraventions were serious enough to warrant a bond under section 70NEB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), and whether costs should be awarded to Ms. Paulson for the proceedings.
The court found that Mr. Castro's actions constituted contraventions of the parenting orders without reasonable excuse. Considering the nature of the contraventions, the court determined they were less serious contraventions within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly, the court ordered Mr. Castro to enter into a bond for a period of 12 months, requiring him to comply with all parenting orders. Additionally, the court mandated Mr. Castro to pay Ms. Paulson’s costs of $8,000 within 60 days. The court dismissed the application for contravention (Amended) but retained the liberty to re-list the matter if Mr. Castro failed to comply with the bond requirement.
This case underscores the importance of adhering to parenting orders and the court's willingness to enforce compliance through bonds and financial penalties.
Orders
Orders of the court
BRC 4120 of 2014
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:
MS PAULSON
Applicant
AND:
MR CASTRO
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE DICKSON
DATE OF ORDER:
27 MARCH 2024
UPON NOTING:
A. That the respondent father admits that he has contravened without reasonable excuse the following parenting orders made 14 October 2016:
(a) 3 October 2021, order 16(a);
(b) 5 January 2022, order 16(c);
(c) 1 May 2022. order 14;
(d) 20 September 2022, orders 16(a) and 16(b);
(e) 30 October 2022, order 14;
(f) 13 November 2022, order 14;
(g) 17 November 2022, order 15; and
(h) 27 November 2022, order 14.
B. That the contraventions were less serious contraventions within the meaning of subdivision E of Division 13A of Part VII of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Pursuant to section 70NEB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (‘the Act’) the father is required to enter into a Bond pursuant to section 70NEC of the Act for a period of 12 months from the day upon which the father enters into the Bond upon condition that the father complies with all parenting orders made and to be made under the Act.
2. The father do attend at the Brisbane Registry of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia in person on 28 March 2024 at 2:30pm (Queensland Time) to receive an explanation in relation to the Bond referred to in Order 1 as required by section 70NEC(5) and to sign the Bond in the presence of Judicial Registrar of the Court.
3. Pursuant to section 70NEB(1)(f) of the Act, the father do pay the mother’s costs of and incidental to the mother’s Application for Contravention (Amended) in the sum of EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS ($8,000.00) (GST inclusive) within sixty (60) days of this order.
4. There be liberty to re-list this matter before Judge Dickson upon written application to her Associate at …@... in the event that the father does not comply with the requirement to enter the bond referred to in paragraph 1 herein.
5. The Application for Contravention (Amended) filed on 9 November 2023 do otherwise stand dismissed.
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.
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.