PRITCHARD & NUNN

[2015] FCCA 743

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PRITCHARD & NUNN [2015] FCCA 743

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Children – parenting orders – interim orders – application to vary consent orders – best interests of the children considered – equal shared parental responsibility – gradual increase in time spent with child over time – appointment of Independent Children’s Lawyer.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.60CA, 60B, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAC

Cases cited:
Goode & Goode (2006) 206 FLR 212
MRR v GR (2010) 240 CLR 461

Applicant: MR PRITCHARD

Respondent: MS NUNN

File Number: SYC 6168 of 2014

Judgment of: Chief Judge Pascoe

Interim Hearing date: 10 March 2015

Date of Last Submission: 10 March 2015

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 2 April 2015

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Neill McPherson

Solicitors for the Applicant: Greg Alfonzetti Solicitor

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr John Weaver

Solicitors for the Respondent: McDonnell Schoder

ORDERS

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s.68L of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), an Independent Children’s Layer be appointed and I request the Legal Aid Commission of NSW to provide such representation.

2. The parties provide to the Legal Aid Commission of NSW (PO Box K847 HAYMARKET NEW SOUTH WALES) within 28 days all documents filed in these proceedings by the party, together with all existing orders and copies of any relevant reports.

3. The Independent Children’s Lawyer be granted leave to photocopy any subpoenaed material for the purpose of providing such material to either a Family Consultant or Expert.

4. The Independent Children’s Lawyer has liberty to apply to the Court to have the matter relisted at three days’ notice.

5. The Applicant and Respondent each enrol in and complete by the end of September 2015 a Parenting After Separation course and provide a certificate of completion to the other party’s solicitor and the Independent Children’s Lawyer.

UNTIL FURTHER ORDER, THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. By consent, the parties shall have equal shared responsibility of their child, X, born (omitted) 2009.

2. X shall live with the Respondent Mother.

3. X will spend time with the Applicant Father as follows:

   (a)10:00am to 5:00pm each Sunday; and

   (b)Every fourth Saturday from 10:00am to 5:00pm

4. The time identified in Order 8 shall take place, except as provided in Order 10, in the presence and under the supervision of the paternal grandfather of X.

5. During the time X spends with the Father, the Father may take X on an outing to an age-appropriate public place without supervision by the paternal grandfather. Details of the outing are to be pre-organised and the paternal grandfather provided with the relevant details prior to the outing.

NOTE A: These day trips are to provide opportunity for the Father and X to enjoy time together outside of the general supervised home environment. The outings are not to excuse the paternal grandfather from his supervision duties when the Father and X are at his home and Orders 8 and 9 apply on all other occasions.

1. As of 2 July 2015, or the date of the Father’s delivery to the solicitor for the Respondent of a certificate of completion of his anger management course, whichever is later, the time identified in Order 9 shall be unsupervised, rendering Orders 9 and 10 ineffective.

2. One month after the activation of Order 11, X will also spend the last weekend of each month with the Father from 10:00am Saturday morning until 5:00pm Sunday afternoon. This Order will suspend Order 8(b).

NOTE B: This overnight time shall be under the overall supervision of the paternal grandfather, with the Father free to take X on outings in accordance with Order 10.

1. There is to be a Communications Book for the parents to communicate with each other in relation to X. This Communications Book is to be made available to the Independent Children’s Lawyer immediately upon request.

2. The Father is to advise the Independent Children’s Lawyer by letter and the Mother via the Communications Book five days prior to the commencement of overnight time identified in Order 12 details of where X will be spending overnight time.

3. The Mother shall, by way of the Communications Book, advise the Father of any special instructions as to X’s care.

4. For the purposes of facilitating X spending time with the Father, changeover shall take place at McDonalds Restaurant, (omitted).

5. The Father is permitted to communicate with X by telephone each Tuesday between 6:00pm and 6:30pm, with the Father to facilitate the call to the Mother’s mobile telephone. This communication is to be private and not listened to by any other person.

6. The Father is restrained from ingesting anabolic steroids during the time X is with him and for a period of 48 hours prior to him spending time with X.

NOTE C: The Father has not admitted to current use of anabolic steroids.

1. Each party be restrained from denigrating the other party, and/or members of the other party’s family, and/or household in the presence of and/or in the hearing of the child. Further, it is the responsibility of each party to remove X from the presence and/or hearing of any third party who does so. For the purpose of this Order, ‘denigration’ shall include commentary in a negative way regarding race, skin colour, religion, or culture.

2. Each party be restrained from using any form of physical discipline on the child.

3. Each party be restrained from leaving the child unsupervised by a responsible adult.

4. Each party shall supervise the child while the child is in that party’s care, unless an emergency occurs or the child is in day care or school.

5. Except in the event of an emergency, the parties shall communicate with each other with respect to parenting matters only, and via the Communications Book.

6. Text messages may be used in circumstances where the Communications Book is unavailable to the party wishing to communicate. Each party shall respond to any text message from the other party within a reasonable period of time, the text messages are to be saved, that the content of the text messages are to be noted in the Communications Book.

7. Each party keep the other party informed of their current telephone number. In the case of a party’s telephone number changing, the party whose number has changed is to inform the other party of the change and supply the new telephone number to that party within 48 hours of the change.

8. Each party inform the other party as soon as practicable of:

   (a)Any illness or injury that may be suffered by X whilst he is in their care, respectively; and

   (b)The name and contact details of any medical practitioner or healthcare provider upon whom X may attend from time to time.

9. Each party do all acts and things necessary to authorise any treating medical practitioner of X to discuss his heath and treatment with the other party.

10. Both the Applicant and Respondent has leave to bring the matter back before the Court with three days’ notice.

11. Pursuant to s.65DA(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the particulars of the obligations these Orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a party contravenes these Orders are attached to these Orders.

12. The matter is listed for mention before me on Tuesday 8 September 2015 at 10:00am.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Pritchard & Nunn is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 6168 of 2014

MR PRITCHARD

Applicant

And

MS NUNN

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

1. This is an Application by the Applicant Father to vary Orders made by the Court by consent, dated 17 December 2014. The Orders relate to the child of the parties, X, aged 5. The matter for determination is the time the Father will spend with X.  

Background

1. The parties were married in 2007 after cohabitation for five years. X was born (omitted) 2009. The parties separated under the same roof on 11 August 2013, and physically separated in January 2014.

2. During the first quarter of 2014, the parties agreed that:

   1)Both parties would have shared parental responsibility of X;

   2)X would live with the Mother;

   3)X would spend time with the Father every alternate weekend, overnight and unsupervised, commencing Friday afternoon, after day-care, and concluding at 8:30pm on Sunday night.

3. This arrangement was altered by agreement in April 2014. The Father’s time with X was augmented to allow one of the alternate weekends per month to conclude on Monday morning at the commencement of day-care. On 21 August 2014, this agreement was mutually formalised into a parenting plan via a mediator.

4. This arrangement continued until September 2014, when the Mother deviated from the parenting plan. On 1 October 2014, the Father applied to this Court for parenting orders.

5. In late October 2014, the Mother unilaterally ceased all contact between X and the Father.

6. On 5 November 2014, the Mother filed a Notice of Risk of Family Violence.

7. On 17 December 2014, the matter came before His Honour Judge Kemp, and His Honour made Orders reflecting consent orders made by the parties. His Honour relisted the mater for Interim Hearing to re-examine the efficacy of those Orders on 26 February 2015. Before that date, the matter was transferred to my docket.

8. Relevantly, His Honour’s Orders can be briefly detailed as follows:

   1)Both parties shall have shared parental responsibility for X;

   2)X shall live with the Mother;

   3)X shall spend time with the Father as follows:

   i)10:00am to 3:00pm each Sunday;

   ii)On 25 December 2014, 10:00am to 3:00pm;

   under the supervision of X’s paternal grandfather, Mr Pritchard Snr (“Mr Pritchard Snr”).

   4)The Father shall have telephone communication on Tuesday evenings, between 6:00pm and 6:30pm via the Mother’s mobile telephone.

9. The parties attended a Child Dispute Conference on 17 December 2014. A report was issued the same day.

10. The matter was listed for Interim Hearing on 10 March 2015.

11. Pending final orders, the Father seeks to reinstate the arrangements prior to the parenting plan.

12. On an Interim basis, the Mother seeks to maintain the Orders, made by His Honour Judge Kemp on 17 December 2014.

Submissions

1. Counsel for the Father advised the Court that the Father has commenced an anger management course and tendered evidence as to that fact.

2. Counsel also addressed the claim made by the Mother that the Father uses steroids. Counsel stated that the applicant admits to using steroids prior to the birth of X however he has since ceased to use steroids. By way of evidence, counsel tendered pathology results that indicate the Father has a normal level of testosterone, which is, prima facie, consistent with that of a man who does not take steroids.

3. Counsel for the Father objected to the Mother’s filing of a Notice of Risk of Family Violence, filed 5 November 2014. In that document the acts of abuse were identified, with reference to the Affidavit sworn by the Mother on 4 November 2014 and filed on 10 November 2014, as follows:

   “1) Paragraph 11 - Child falls of the bed while in the Father’s care.
   2) Paragraph 13 - Child allowed to wander off in a restaurant while in Father’s care.”

4. Further, in the same document, the alleged acts of family violence were identified, with reference to the Affidavit sworn by the Mother on 4 November 2014 and filed on 10 November 2014, as follows:

   “1) Paragraph 45 – Conflict between the Father and his sister, Ms K.
   2) Paragraph 45 – Conflict between the Father and his sister, Ms K.
   3) Paragraph 59 – Father yells at child during a telephone conversation.”

5. Counsel submitted that these concerns are not the type of concerns that warrant the use of a Notice of Risk of Family Violence, describing the use of the document as “spurious and outrageous.” Moreover, counsel questioned the delay in filing such a Notice in the circumstances where it appeared that the Father’s parenting was not of concern and “good enough” prior to the filing.  

6. Whilst counsel stated that the Father did admit to the fact that the two stipulated events in relation to the child did occur, the events occurred several years ago, were innocent and accidental, and the Father was unlikely to repeat them.

7. Counsel raised a concern about privacy when X and his Father communicate by telephone. The Father objects to the Mother listening in on the conversations or having the telephone on ‘speaker phone’ so as to be able to hear the conversation.

8. Counsel suggested that both parties would benefit from the completion of a parenting course. This recommendation is consistent with the Mother’s proposed orders, contained with her Response to Initiating Application filed 10 November 2014.

9. Finally, Counsel for the Father indicated that the sudden cessation of contact between the Father and X would be very distressing for the child and that the reinstitution of regular time arrangements is in X’s best interests.

10. Counsel for the Mother relied on the recommendation from the Child Dispute Conference that supervised time remains the best course of action until final hearing.

11. Counsel argued that the present arrangements, namely, the Orders of His Honour Judge Kemp dated 17 December 2014, should continue. Moreover, the Mother does not object to a programme whereby time with the Father can slowly increase as trust and parenting skills improve.

12. Counsel for the Mother stated that the Mother believes that X has an element of fear, becomes upset, or is “emotionally reluctant” when preparing to speak to the Father or be in his presence.

13. Counsel for the Mother replied to the statement that the filed Notice of Risk was “spurious and outrageous” by stating that the Notice was necessary so as to clearly illustrate the level of concern felt by the Mother about X’s welfare when with the Father.

14. Finally, Counsel referred to the fact that the present arrangements, which provided supervised time, were necessary as any source of conflict that may exist or arise between the Father and his sister Ms K would be neutralised in the grandfather’s home as he is in a position of authority.

15. Counsel concluded that the Mother sincerely wants the Father to continue and develop his relationship with X, however wants to ensure the child’s safety.

16. Counsel for the Father reiterated that telephone calls between the Father and his son were private and they were not to be listened in by the Mother.

Relevant Law

1. The legal principles which govern parenting proceedings are set out in Part VII of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”). Section 60CA of the Act requires the Court, when deciding whether to make a parenting order, to regard the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration.

2. Section 60B(1) of the Act enumerates the objects of Part VII of the Act as ensuring the best interests of children, in this case X, are met by:

   a)ensuring that X has the benefit of both of his parents having a meaningful involvement in his life, to the maximum extent consistent with the best interests of X; and

   b)protecting X from physical or psychological harm from being subjected to, or exposed to, abuse, neglect, or family violence; and

   c)ensuring that X receives adequate and proper parenting to help him achieve his full potential; and

   d)ensuring that X’s parents fulfil their duties, and meet their responsibilities, concerning the care, welfare and development of X.

3. In exercising my discretion as to what Order is in X’s best interests, I must have regard to the factors outlined in s.60CC of the Act, as amended. Although the two primary considerations detailed at s.60CC(2)(a) and (b) of the Act must assume greater importance than the additional considerations at s.60CC(3) of the Act when determining what Orders are in the best interests X, I must consider all the factors before making a determination.

4. In considering the objects of Part VII of the Act, it is necessary to also have regard to the principles underlying those objectives and the legislative pathways outlined in various Full Court of the Family Court of Australia decisions, including Goode & Goode (2006) 206 FLR 212, and the High Court decision in MRR v GR (2010) 240 CLR 461.

Primary Considerations

S.60CC(2)(a) The benefit to X of having a meaningful relationship with both of his parents

1. X is currently five years old and has recently commenced primary school. It appears that X has had an ongoing relationship with the Father from birth until October 2014 when the Mother unilaterally ceased contact between the Father and the child. Various reasons were advanced as to why this occurred, including allegations as to what had happened while the child was in the Father’s care, although some time ago, and allegations of family violence, although these allegations did not go directly to any alleged violence by the Father to the Mother or X.

2. Counsel for the Father put forward the view that the cessation of the Father’s time with X was a response to the Father entering into a new relationship.

3. For a child of X’s age, it is clearly important that he have regular ongoing contact with his Father. I am also concerned that there is a healthy bond between the child and the Father. In this regard I am concerned that X does not develop an impression that somehow he is unsafe in the care of his Father unless there is clear evidence that this is the case.

4. I am also of the view that the time X spends with his Father is appropriate for a child of his age and the possibilities for conflict between the parties at changeover is minimised.

5. Based on the limited evidence presented, I find that X should spend regular time with the Father as ordered by His Honour Judge Kemp with some modifications designed to make X’s time with the Father easier, and to also ensure that there is an opportunity for him to interact with his Father a way that is age appropriate and normal.

6. Overnight time is, in my view, less important for a child of X’s age than regular quality time. These Orders provide for X to eventually spend unsupervised overnight time with the Father, but only after the Father has completed his anger management course, and has shown that he is able to care for X in an unsupervised environment.

7. I have also provided that the Mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer (to be appointed) be supplied with the details of where X will be staying, and the Mother to communicate to the Father care instructions. In the event of any problem, I have also provided for the Independent Children’s Lawyer, and either of the parties, to have leave to approach the Court on three days’ notice.

8. I am encouraged by the fact that the Mother has said that she wishes to encourage a good, long-term relationship between X and the Father, and the evidence demonstrates that for most of X’s life, this has indeed been the case.

s.60CC(2)(b) The need to protect X from physical or psychological harm from being subjected to, or exposed to, abuse, neglect or family violence

1. Clearly, at an interim hearing and without the benefit of a Family Report, it is difficult to form any firm conclusion about the extent of any violence or neglect.

2. It is important to note, however, that none of the allegations of violence on the part of the Father relate to alleged violence against either the Mother or X, although the Mother does express concern about the possibility of X being exposed to arguments between the Father and his sister, Ms K.

3. I discount the two incidents referred to by the Mother; namely X falling off the bed while his nappy was being changed by the Father, and wandering away whilst in the Father’s care in a crowded restaurant. Both incidents were some time ago, and, whilst they may have involved some inattention, were clearly not deliberate.

4. On the balance on the limited material before me, I find that X is unlikely to be at risk of harm from the Father despite the incidents referred to above and the fact that the Father may have previously used steroids. I note that for most of X’s life, the Mother has been happy for X to spend time with the Father.

1. I am, however, conscious of the recommendations from the Child Dispute Conference Family Consultant that supervised contact is the most cautious approach pending final hearing.

2. Given that this may be some time away, I have provided a graduated time scale for unsupervised time for X to spend with the Father but with the Independent Children’s Lawyer and the parties each able to approach the Court quickly if any problems develop.

Additional considerations

s.60CC(3)(a) Any views expressed by X and any factors (such as X’s maturity or level of understanding) the Court thinks are relevant to the weight it should give X’s views.

1. There is no clear evidence as to X’s views, which, in any case, would be of limited weight given his age.

s.60CC(3)(b) The nature of the relationship of X with: (i) each of the parents and (ii) other persons (including any grandparent or other relative of the child)

1. Based on the limited evidence available, I am satisfied that X has an ongoing relationship with both of his parents.

2. It is also clear that X has a close relationship with Mr Pritchard Snr.

3. There was no evidence as to how X relates to any other family member or the partner of either party.

4. Although there was no evidence as to any relationship between X and the Father’s sister, Ms K, there was evidence that the Father and Ms K have a stormy relationship. As Ms K lives with Mr Pritchard Snr, the Mother raised a concern as to supervision arrangements when X was in the Father’s care, under Mr Pritchard Snr’s supervision, because of the need to control any altercation between the Father and Ms K. It seemed to be agreed between parties that Mr Pritchard Snr was able to contain any possible outbreak between the Father and Ms K.

5. Clearly, however, this is not an ideal situation for X. I have no doubt Mr Pritchard Snr is a responsible and suitable supervisor but it is difficult to see how supervision by him with the possibility of his having to referee between his children is in X’s best interests.

6. The presence of overall supervision for an extended period, whilst allowing the Father unsupervised outings with X, is, in my view, an appropriate balance and in X’s best interests.

s.60CC(3)(c) The extent to which each of X’s parents have taken, or failed to take, the opportunity (i) to participate in making decisions about major long-term issues in relation to X, (ii) to spend time with X, and (iii) to communicate with the child.

1. On the basis of limited evidence, it is clear that the parties have each participated in making long term decisions regarding X’s upbringing, have spent time with him, and have regular communication with him.

2. I am of the view that X should be able to speak privately to his Father on the telephone without interference or participation, beyond handset operation, of the Mother or anyone else.

s.60CC(3)(ca) The extent to which each of X’s parents have fulfilled, or failed to fulfil, the parent’s obligation to maintain X.

1. The mother is the primary carer of X.

2. There was no other evidence in relation to this matter.

s.60CC(3)(d) The likely effect of any changes in X’s circumstances, including the likely effect on X of any separation from (i) either of his parents, or (ii) any other child, or other person (including any grandparent or other relative of X), with whom he has been living.

1. It is clearly in X’s interests for regular ongoing contact with his Father to continue.

2. The contact between X and his father should be such as to foster and develop their on-going long term relationship. It is important that bonds of trust and affection are nurtured whilst keeping X safe. It, therefore, seems appropriate for X to have unsupervised time with his Father.

3. In my opinion, the Father should spend some time with X without supervision and then move to supervised overnight time, and, if all goes appropriately, to unsupervised overnight time.

4. Such an arrangement, whilst a compromise between the proposals of each party, is, in my opinion, in X’s best interests and is also likely to cause the least conflict between the parents.

5. It is important that both parties comply with the Orders so there are no more sudden changes in X’s spending time with the Father.

s.60CC(3)(e) The practical difficulty and expense of X spending time with and communicating with a parent and whether that difficulty or expense will substantially affect X’s right to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis.

1. There does not appear to be any practical difficulty in X spending time and maintaining contact with his Father.

2. I have mentioned above my views as to the Father and X’s right to private telephone conversations.

s.60CC(3)(f) The capacity of (i) each of X’s parents, and (ii) any other person (including any grandparent or other relative of X), to provide for the needs of X, including emotional and intellectual needs.

1. The Mother has always been X’s primary carer. Although the evidence was limited, I accept that the Mother is closely involved in all aspects of X’s life.

2. The Mother has raised concerns about the Father’s previous steroid use, his relationship with his sister, Ms K, and two previous incidents, which may at the very least indicate some lapse of concentration on the part of the Father. The Mother also raises issues about X’s behaviour around contact with the Father and the fact that the presence of the paternal grandfather seems to make the child more comfortable when interacting with his Father.

3. I note also that the Father has voluntarily commenced an anger management programme.

4. The Mother will continue to provide ongoing care to X, the Father is an important figure in the child’s life and this relationship should be supported. The paternal grandfather has an important ongoing role.

s.60CC(3)(g) The maturity, sex, lifestyle and background (including culture and traditions) of X and either of his parents, and any other characteristics of X that the Court thinks relevant.

1. X is a relatively young child who is just starting school. There is no evidence that he is other than a normal and well-adjusted child. It is important that he has a positive relationship with his Father and my Orders reflect both the need for him to feel safe and to have a positive attitude towards each of his parents.

s.60CC(3)(i) The attitude to X, and to the responsibilities of parenthood, demonstrated by each of X’s parents.

1. On the limited evidence available, it would appear that both parents love X and want to be part of his life.

2. There is no evidence that X is in any physical danger from his Father, although it would seem that the Father has at least some issues with anger management, which he is addressing. It is important that X is not exposed to any arguments between the Father and his sister which may disturb him.

s.60CC(3)(j) Any family violence involving X or a member of X’s family.

1. I have dealt with this matter earlier, however there is no clear evidence that X or his Mother have been exposed to violence by the Father

2. I give very limited weight to possible conflict between the Father and his sister.

s.60CC(3)(l) Whether it would be preferable to make the order that would be least likely to lead to the institution of further proceedings in relation to X.

1. These orders are Interim in nature and designed to facilitate ongoing contact between X and his Father. It is intended that these Orders will be reviewed in approximately six months’ time.

s.60CC(3)(m) Any other fact or circumstance that the Court thinks is relevant.

1. In light of the evidence, I am concerned to ensure that X does not form an impression that somehow he is not safe with his Father whilst simultaneously maintaining his ongoing relationship with the paternal grandfather.

Parental Responsibility

1. Section 65DAC of the Act applies whenever a parenting order provides for shared parental responsibility, and requires each party to consult the other and to make a genuine effort to come to a joint decision about any major long-term decisions concerning X.

2. Section 61DA of the Act requires the Court to apply a presumption that it is in the best interests of X for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility. The presumption does not apply if there are reasonable grounds to believe that either the Mother or Father or both (or a person who lives with either party) has engaged in:

   a)Abuse of X; or

   b)Family violence.

3. I have previously noted the incidents the Mother has raised in relation to the Father, however, as mentioned earlier, there is no evidence of family violence or abuse.

4. I also find that there is no evidence which would satisfy the Court that it would not be in X’s best interests for his parents to have equal shared parental reasonability.

Discussion and Determination

1. I have ordered the appointment of an Independent Children’s Lawyer in this matter on the basis of the allegations of family violence and the current level of conflict between the parties. There is a clear need for an independent voice on behalf of X.

2. I have previously referred to changeover when X spends time with the Father. For a child of X’s age, it is inappropriate for changeover to take place too late in the evening especially when the child has school the next day.

3. In addition, given the need for X to spend quality time with his Father and to try to avoid any perception on the part of the child that somehow the Father presents a danger to him, I propose to allow the Father to take X on unaccompanied outings to public places, such as the zoo, parks, shops, et cetera, during the time the Father spend with X. These outings are the exception to the rule that the time the Father spends with X is primarily spent at the paternal grandfather’s residence.  

4. In this way, X gets to spend quality, one-on-one time with his Father but with an overall framework designed to ensure that the child feels comfortable.

5. This is conducive to building the best long term relationship between X and his Father.

6. In all the circumstances it is, in my opinion, in X’s best interests that there be a graduated scale of time spent by the Father with the child, which can increase with time. The time X spends with the Father unsupervised should increase as his parenting skills and confidence on the part of X, and the Mother, and the Father improves. This should ensure that X’s relationship with his Father improves over time.

7. It is also important that the Father complete his anger management course. Once the Father has completed his anger management course, or after three months, whichever is the latest, the time spent with X on Sunday will be unsupervised.

8. Further, after four months from the date of my Orders, or one month after the Father delivers to the solicitor for the Mother a certificate of completion of his anger management course, X will spend the last weekend of each month with the Father from 10:00am Saturday morning until 5:00pm Sunday afternoon. This overnight time will be spent under the overall supervision of the paternal grandfather, with the Father free to take X on outings to age-appropriate venues.

9. Both parents are to enrol and complete by the next Court date the Parenting After Separation course.

10. I will revisit the matter in approximately six months from the date of my Orders. I expect by this time to have a much clearer picture of how the arrangements are working, the benefit of the input of an Independent Children’s Lawyer, evidence as to the parties’ management of my Orders, and X’s level of comfort with them.

11. I give the Independent Children’s Lawyer leave to apply to the Court on three days’ notice.

12. I note again the Mother has expressed a wish to promote a long term relationship between X and the Father. It is clearly important that despite their own differences both parties put X first and support a close relationship between X and each other.

13. I make the appropriate Orders. 

I certify that the preceding ninety-three (93) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Chief Judge Pascoe

Associate: 

Date:  1 April 2015