Read and Oakley and Anor

[2008] FamCAFC 77

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

READ & OAKLEY AND ANOR [2008] FamCAFC 77

FAMILY LAW - APPEAL – From decision of Family Court judge – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – RELOCATION – Mother has three children each with a different father – Two children lived with the mother in a different town to where the fathers lived – Fathers of two children are brothers – Brothers jointly sought orders that the children return to the place where the brothers lived, and where the children had lived previously with the mother – The fathers’ preference in the orders sought was that the mother would also return and that the children would live with her and that each father would spend time with his child five nights out of every fourteen – Fathers willing to take on primary care of their respective child if the mother did not relocate – Mother sought orders permitting her to relocate to another city or to remain where she was currently living – The mother’s case before the trial Judge was that she would not relocate to the town where the fathers were living – The trial Judge made orders for equal shared parental responsibility and for the children to live in the town where the fathers resided – Options were given in the orders for the mother’s relocation– Mother appealed – The essential point argued on appeal was whether the trial Judge had failed to properly weigh relevant factors – Consequences for the children considered – Appeal dismissed – No order as to costs

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s 60CC

Norbis v Norbis (1986) FLC 91‑712
Sampson and Hartnett (No. 10) [2007] FamCA 1365

APPELLANT: MS READ

FIRST RESPONDENT: MR P OAKLEY

SECOND RESPONDENT: MR G OAKLEY

APPEAL NUMBER: NA 9 of 2008

FILE NUMBER: TVF 1731 2002

DATE DELIVERED: 6 June 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Bryant CJ, Warnick and Boland JJ

HEARING DATE: 14 May 2008

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Family Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE: 20 December 2007

LOWER COURT MNC: [2007] FamCA 1520

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr Hibble

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPELLANT: Purcell Taylor Lawyers

FIRST RESPONDENT: In person

SECOND RESPONDENT: In person

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER Ms Benson

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Cope Family Law

Orders

1. That the appeal be dismissed.

2. That there be no order as to costs.

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

THE FULL COURT OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

Appeal Number: NA 9 of 2008

File Number: TVF 1731 of 2002

MS READ

Appellant

And

MR P OAKLEY

First Respondent

And

MR G OAKLEY

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. Ms Read has three children, each having a different father.  In July 2007, the eldest child (14 years of age) moved from living with the mother to…