Reilly and Sully (No 2)
Case
•
[2017] FamCA 659
•21 July 2017
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Reilly and Sully (No 2) [2017] FamCA 659
[2017] FamCA 659
21 July 2017
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Reilly and Sully (No 2)*, Gill J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered orders relating to the living arrangements and contact between a father and his child, [B]. The dispute concerned the terms of supervised contact between the father and child, following a contested interim hearing.
The court was required to determine the specific arrangements for the child's residence and the conditions under which the father would have supervised time with the child. This involved considering the suspension of previous orders and the imposition of injunctions for the child's protection, balanced against the need for supervised contact.
Gill J discharged previous orders made by Justice Loughnan and made new orders following a contested hearing, with some agreement on the mechanics of supervised time. The court ordered that the child live with the mother and suspended certain previous orders. Injunctions were imposed restraining the father from communicating with or approaching the child, the child's residence, and the child's school. These injunctions were suspended to allow for supervised time between the father and child, to be facilitated by a contact service at the father's expense. The court also detailed the specific dates and times for this supervised contact, including provisions for make-up time and the requirement for both parents to cooperate with the contact service.
The court was required to determine the specific arrangements for the child's residence and the conditions under which the father would have supervised time with the child. This involved considering the suspension of previous orders and the imposition of injunctions for the child's protection, balanced against the need for supervised contact.
Gill J discharged previous orders made by Justice Loughnan and made new orders following a contested hearing, with some agreement on the mechanics of supervised time. The court ordered that the child live with the mother and suspended certain previous orders. Injunctions were imposed restraining the father from communicating with or approaching the child, the child's residence, and the child's school. These injunctions were suspended to allow for supervised time between the father and child, to be facilitated by a contact service at the father's expense. The court also detailed the specific dates and times for this supervised contact, including provisions for make-up time and the requirement for both parents to cooperate with the contact service.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Injunction
-
Remedies
-
Costs
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Reilly and Sully (No 2) [2017] FamCA 659
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0