Phillips & Hansford

In the case of Phillips & Hansford, the mother appealed the interim parenting orders made by a primary judge in the Family Court. The mother contested the interim orders, arguing that the primary judge had erred in making them without conducting a Rice and Asplund hearing and without considering the necessary s 60CC factors. The father opposed the appeal and sought costs. The mother also sought to adduce further evidence that was likely to be controversial, but this evidence was deemed inadmissible.

The court examined whether the primary judge erred by making the interim orders without a Rice and Asplund hearing and whether the necessary s 60CC considerations were taken into account. The court found that the primary judge had not erred and had considered the relevant s 60CC factors. The mother's arguments lacked merit, and the appeal was dismissed. Additionally, the mother's application to adduce further evidence was dismissed as the evidence was not admissible.

The court dismissed the mother's appeal and ordered the respondent's application in an appeal be dismissed. The court also dismissed the mother's application to adduce further evidence. Any party seeking an order for costs was required to file and serve written submissions within 28 days of the date of the orders, with the other party responding within a further 28 days. The party seeking the costs could file submissions in reply within a further 7 days. The form of the order was subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.