Richards and Morris (No 3)
Case
•
[2015] FamCA 901
•21 October 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Richards and Morris (No 3) [2015] FamCA 901
[2015] FamCA 901
21 October 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Richards and Morris (No 3)*, Tree J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning the children G and S. The dispute involved the father, Mr Richards, and the mother, Ms Morris, regarding the children's living arrangements, parental responsibility, and contact.
The court was required to determine the most appropriate parenting orders for the children, specifically addressing issues of where the children should live, who should hold parental responsibility, and the extent of direct and indirect contact the mother should have with the children and the father. The court also considered the role of the Independent Children's Lawyer and the disposition of outstanding applications.
Tree J ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The children were to live with the father, who was granted sole parental responsibility, with no requirement to consult the mother. The mother was largely prohibited from having any direct or indirect contact with the children or the father, with limited exceptions for sending gifts, photos, and cards on specific occasions, subject to the father's discretion regarding their appropriateness. The father was ordered to provide the mother with a bi-annual report on the children's health, wellbeing, and progress, including photographs. The Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged, and all extant applications, save for undetermined contravention applications, were dismissed.
The court was required to determine the most appropriate parenting orders for the children, specifically addressing issues of where the children should live, who should hold parental responsibility, and the extent of direct and indirect contact the mother should have with the children and the father. The court also considered the role of the Independent Children's Lawyer and the disposition of outstanding applications.
Tree J ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The children were to live with the father, who was granted sole parental responsibility, with no requirement to consult the mother. The mother was largely prohibited from having any direct or indirect contact with the children or the father, with limited exceptions for sending gifts, photos, and cards on specific occasions, subject to the father's discretion regarding their appropriateness. The father was ordered to provide the mother with a bi-annual report on the children's health, wellbeing, and progress, including photographs. The Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged, and all extant applications, save for undetermined contravention applications, were dismissed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Jurisdiction
-
Natural Justice
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
9
Statutory Material Cited
3
Banks & Banks
[2015] FamCAFC 36
Wacal Developments Pty Ltd v Realty Developments Pty Ltd
[1978] HCA 30
S v Australian Crime Commission
[2005] FCA 1310