Pullman and Pullman

Link copied
Case Copied 30 min read

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PULLMAN & PULLMAN [2017] FamCA 1057
FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Interim  – Where previous consent orders in place for child to live with mother and spend alternate weekend time with father – Where child has remained in father’s care since November 2017 – Where father seeks suspension of consent orders – Where father seeks sole parental responsibility and for child to live with him and spend only supervised time with mother – Where mother seeks a return of the child and for a continuation of previous consent orders – Where mother advised court she intended to move to Sydney – Where mother did not seek an interim relocation order with child – Where mother’s imminent move to Sydney renders her orders sought impossible – Where mother opposed any supervised time with child – Where child’s mental health at risk if she was to return to the mother – Where it is in the best interests for the child to live with father – Where father to have sole parental responsibility in the interim – Where child to have communication with mother – Appointment of an Independent Children’s Lawyer – Family report and psychiatric assessment to be prepared.        
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60B, 60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAA, 65DAC
Banks & Banks [2015] FamCAFC 36
Mauldera & Orbel (2014) FLC 93-602
Wacando v The Commonwealth (1981) 148 CLR 1
S v Australian Crime Commission (2005) 144 FCR 431
Goode & Goode (2006) FLC 93-286
Salah & Salah [2016] FamCAFC 100
APPLICANT: Mr Pullman
RESPONDENT: Ms Pullman
FILE NUMBER: CSC 391 of 2012
DATE DELIVERED: 15 December 2017
PLACE DELIVERED: Cairns
PLACE HEARD: Cairns
JUDGMENT OF: Tree J
HEARING DATE: 5 December 2017

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITORS FOR THE APPLICANT: Millyard Family Lawyers
THE RESPONDENT: In person

Orders

  1. Paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 6(b), 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Orders of 28 August 2013 be stayed.

  2. That B born … 2004 (“the child”), live with the father and he have sole parental responsibility for her.

  3. That the mother be permitted to communicate with the child each Sunday and Wednesday by Skype or telephone between 6:00pm and 6:30pm, with the father being permitted to supervise such calls, and terminate a call if he believes that it has become inappropriate.

  4. The mother be prohibited from removing the child from the father’s care or any school, counsellor or other organisation attend by the child from time to time.

  5. That the child continue attending “C Group” for as long as is recommended by that organisation.

  6. That the father arrange for the child to attend upon a child psychiatrist for the purpose of assessing her mental health and receiving such treatment as is recommended by that psychiatrist.

  7. That the father advise the mother and keep the mother advised of the child’s treating health professionals.

  8. That the mother be restrained from contacting the staff of “C Group,” D School or any other counsellor treating…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Pullman and Pullman 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 1057
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Pullman and Pullman*, Tree J considered applications for interim orders concerning the welfare of a child born in 2004. The dispute involved the parents' competing claims regarding the child's living arrangements, parental responsibility, and communication with each parent. The court was tasked with determining the most appropriate interim arrangements to safeguard the child's best interests pending final resolution of the proceedings.

The central legal issues before the court were: (1) with whom the child should live and who should have sole parental responsibility; (2) the nature and extent of the mother's communication with the child; (3) whether the mother should be prohibited from removing the child from the father's care or from attending certain institutions; (4) the child's ongoing participation in therapeutic services and the father's responsibility for arranging psychiatric assessments; and (5) the extent to which the mother should be restrained from contacting the child's service providers. The court also considered the appointment of an Independent Children's Lawyer and the preparation of various reports.

Tree J made orders that the child live with the father and that he have sole parental responsibility. The mother was permitted limited supervised communication with the child via Skype or telephone. Crucially, the mother was prohibited from removing the child from the father's care or from any educational or therapeutic institutions the child attended. The father was directed to ensure the child continued attending "C Group," arranged for a psychiatric assessment of the child, and kept the mother informed of the child's treating professionals. The mother was restrained from contacting the child's service providers. The court also ordered the appointment of an Independent Children's Lawyer to facilitate the preparation of a Family Report and psychiatric assessments of both parents. The remaining applications for interim orders were dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

Paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 6(b), 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Orders of 28 August 2013 be stayed.

2.

That B born … 2004 (“the child”), live with the father and he have sole parental responsibility for her.

3.

That the mother be permitted to communicate with the child each Sunday and Wednesday by Skype or telephone between 6:00pm and 6:30pm, with the father being permitted to supervise such calls, and terminate a call if he believes that it has become inappropriate.

4.

The mother be prohibited from removing the child from the father’s care or any school, counsellor or other organisation attend by the child from time to time.

5.

That the child continue attending “C Group” for as long as is recommended by that organisation.

6.

That the father arrange for the child to attend upon a child psychiatrist for the purpose of assessing her mental health and receiving such treatment as is recommended by that psychiatrist.

7.

That the father advise the mother and keep the mother advised of the child’s treating health professionals.

8.

That the mother be restrained from contacting the staff of “C Group,” D School or any other counsellor treating the child from time to time.

9.

That an Independent Children's Lawyer be appointed and Legal Aid Queensland be requested to arrange such representation.

10.

That the Independent Children's Lawyer organise for the preparation of a Family Report by a psychologist and each of the parties are directed to comply with all reasonable requests of the Independent Children's Lawyer to attend and participate on the dates and times as requested in order for the preparation of the Family Report to occur.

11.

That the Independent Children's Lawyer organise for a psychiatric assessment of the parent parties and for the preparation of a report in this regard and each of the parties are directed to comply with all reasonable requests of the Independent Children's Lawyer to attend and participate on the dates and times as requested in order for the preparation of the psychiatric assessment report.

12.

That otherwise the parties’ applications for interim orders be 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.