Peters and Ortona (No 2)

Case

[2016] FamCA 189

30 March 2016


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Peters and Ortona (No 2) [2016] FamCA 189 [2016] FamCA 189 30 March 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Peters and Ortona (No 2)*, Chief Judge Bryant of the Family Court of Australia made orders concerning the time the children, B and C, would spend with their mother, and related matters. The dispute involved arrangements for the children's contact with their mother, the mother's conduct in relation to discussions about court proceedings and the parties' separation, and the need for a family consultant's assessment.

The court was required to determine the appropriate arrangements for supervised contact between the mother and the children, the extent to which the mother should be restrained from discussing certain matters with the children, and the process for obtaining an assessment from a Family Consultant. Additionally, the court addressed the disclosure of financial information regarding the sale of garages by each party.

The court ordered that the children spend two hours per fortnight with the mother at a nominated children's contact centre, with both parents responsible for making applications and attending assessments. The mother was restrained from discussing court proceedings or issues relating to the separation with the children. The court also permitted the mother to arrange private supervised contact at her expense, subject to the Independent Children's Lawyer's approval. Furthermore, pursuant to s 11F of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), the children were ordered to attend an appointment with a Family Consultant for assessment, with the father to deliver the children for this purpose. The Family Consultant was granted liberty to inspect the court file and relevant documents for the assessment. The matter was adjourned, and both parties were ordered to provide detailed statements regarding the sale of their respective garages.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Civil Procedure

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Discovery

  • Injunction

  • Procedural Fairness

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0