Renton and Stapleton - [2014] FCCA 1598

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

RENTON & STAPLETON

[2014] FCCA 1598

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Priority of Court’s attention to protection of children from family violence and exposure to risk thereof – parenting issues in light of domestic violence of Father and his assault on Mother’s brother – best interest considerations in application by Mother to remain in town to which she relocated without Father’s consent – Mother’s application to travel overseas to visit sick grandparent.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975, ss.60CA, 60B(1) & (2), 60CC(2)(a) & (b), 60CC(2A), 60CC(3)(a) – (i), 61DA, 65DAA

Cales v Cales (2010) 251 FLR 454; (2011) 44 Fam LR 376
Collu & Rinaldo [2010] FamCAFC 53
McCall v Clark (2009) 41 Fam LR 483
Maluka v Maluka (2012) 45 Fam LR 129
Mazorski v Albright (2008) 37 Fam LR 518
Moose & Moose (2008) FLC ¶93-375
Morgan v Miles (2008) 38 Fam LR 275
Sayer v Radcliffe (2013) 48 Fam LR 298
Taylor v Barker (2008) 37 Fam LR 461

Applicant:

MR RENTON

Respondent:

MS STAPLETON

File Number:

CAC 378 of 2013

Judgment of:

Judge Neville

Hearing dates:

27 & 28 November 2013; 28 May 2014

Date of Last Submission:

28 May 2014

Delivered at:

Canberra

Delivered on:

24 July 2014

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr P. Glissan

Solicitors for the Applicant:

P W Gilderdale, Forbes

Counsel for the Respondent:

Mr M. Hassall

Solicitors for the Respondent:

Sheekey Williams, Wagga Wagga

Solicitor/Advocate for the Independent Children's Lawyer:

Ms L. Hansen

Solicitors for the Independent Children's Lawyer:

Friedlieb Byrne, Wagga Wagga

ORDERS

The Mother is to have sole parental responsibility for the children, X (born (omitted) 2009) and Y (born (omitted) 2011) (“the children”);
The Mother is to keep the Father informed of all major, long-term decisions regarding the children;
The children are to live with the Mother;
The Mother be permitted to reside with the children in (omitted), New South Wales;
For a period of four (4) months from the date of these orders, the Father’s time with the children be supervised and the facilities of the Children’s Contact Service in (omitted) be utilised, to the maximum extent provided by that contact centre and in consultation with the Independent Children’s Lawyer;
After a period of four (4) months has passed, and upon compliance with Orders 10 and 11 of these orders, the Independent Children’s Lawyer is to review the notes from the contact centre, and if in her view the children’s time with their Father has proceeded without relevant incident, for the following two (2) months the children are to spend time with their Father at the paternal grandparents’ house every second Saturday from 10am until 4.00pm;
If the time the children spend with their Father continues to proceed without relevant incident in the view of the Independent Children’s Lawyer, the children will spend time with their Father every second weekend from 4.00pm Friday until 4.00pm Sunday, unless otherwise agreed in writing between the parents;
If the time the children spend…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Renton and Stapleton

Details

AGLC: Renton and Stapleton [2014] FCCA 1598
Case: [2014] FCCA 1598
Decision Date: 24 July 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Renton and Stapleton, heard by Judge Neville, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for two children, X and Y. The orders indicate a contested proceeding where the court was required to make determinations regarding the children's residence, parental responsibility, and the nature and progression of the father's time with them.

The court was tasked with determining the most appropriate parenting orders for the children, specifically addressing issues of sole parental responsibility, the children's living arrangements, and the conditions and progression of the father's contact. Central to the court's consideration was the need to ensure the children's welfare and safety, which necessitated a structured approach to re-establishing the father's relationship with them, contingent on his engagement with therapeutic and educational programs.

Judge Neville ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children and that they live with her. The father's time with the children was to commence with supervised contact for four months, with a review by the Independent Children's Lawyer. The progression to unsupervised time was conditional upon the father's successful completion of a post-separation parenting course and an anger management course within four months, and the Independent Children's Lawyer's assessment that the children's time with him had proceeded without incident. The court outlined a phased approach to increasing the father's time, with further reviews by the Independent Children's Lawyer, and stipulated that supervised time would resume if arrangements did not proceed satisfactorily. The matter was then finalised.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Mother is to have sole parental responsibility for the children, X (born (omitted) 2009) and Y (born (omitted) 2011) (“the children”);

The Mother is to keep the Father informed of all major, long-term decisions regarding the children;

The children are to live with the Mother;

The Mother be permitted to reside with the children in (omitted), New South Wales;

For a period of four (4) months from the date of these orders, the Father’s time with the children be supervised and the facilities of the Children’s Contact Service in (omitted) be utilised, to the maximum extent provided by that contact centre and in consultation with the Independent Children’s Lawyer;

After a period of four (4) months has passed, and upon compliance with Orders 10 and 11 of these orders, the Independent Children’s Lawyer is to review the notes from the contact centre, and if in her view the children’s time with their Father has proceeded without relevant incident, for the following two (2) months the children are to spend time with their Father at the paternal grandparents’ house every second Saturday from 10am until 4.00pm;

If the time the children spend with their Father continues to proceed without relevant incident in the view of the Independent Children’s Lawyer, the children will spend time with their Father every second weekend from 4.00pm Friday until 4.00pm Sunday, unless otherwise agreed in writing between the parents;

If the time the children spend with their Father does not proceed smoothly or to the satisfaction of the Independent Children’s Lawyer, supervised time is to resume (or continue) for a period of four (4) months, again to be reviewed by the Independent Children’s Lawyer, and an increase in time to take place when the Independent Children’s Lawyer is satisfied that this is appropriate;

For the purposes of Orders 5-7 of these orders, changeover is to occur as determined by the Independent Children’s Lawyer, with regard to the progress of the ongoing contact arrangements, and after input in writing from each of the parties (of no more than one (1) page);

10.

The Father is to enrol in, attend and complete a post-separation parenting course within four (4) months of the date of these orders, and he is to provide evidence of doing so to the Independent Children’s Lawyer;

11.

The Father is to enrol in, attend and complete an anger management course within four (4) months of the date of these orders, and he is to provide evidence of doing so to the Independent Children’s Lawyer;

12.

This matter is now finalised and will be immediately removed from the docket.

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.