Ridgeway and Katter

[2016] FamCA 182

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

RIDGEWAY & KATTER [2016] FamCA 182

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Transfer of proceedings – Whether the proceedings should be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court for hearing in D Town – Where the mother is experiencing health issues – Where the matter is no longer in the Magellan List – Application granted.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Ridgeway

RESPONDENT: Mr Katter

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Patrick Dooley

FILE NUMBER: BRC 9837 of 2010

DATE DELIVERED: 3 March 2016

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Forrest J

HEARING DATE: 3 March 2016

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT: In Person

THE RESPONDENT: No Appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Mr Dooley

Dooley Solicitors

Orders

1. The matter is transferred to the Federal Circuit Court for hearing in the D Town Registry.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Ridgeway & Katter has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRC 9837 of 2010

Ms Ridgeway

Applicant

And

Mr Katter

Respondent

And

Independent Children's Lawyer

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The parents in these longstanding parenting proceedings separated in 2008 during the pregnancy that the mother had with the child, B, who was born in 2008.  B is the younger brother of C who was born in 2007.  These two children are now approaching nine and eight years of age respectively and their parents have been litigating about parenting arrangements relating to them since 2010, that is for six years now, almost all of their lives.

2. I know very little about the factual history of this matter but it comes before me this morning in this list for mention. This list being for the mention of some of the Court’s oldest matters pending in its list to determine what should happen to them.   

3. The mother has recently made an application for the proceedings to be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court.  Principally, that application is supported by her on medical and convenience grounds.  The medical grounds relate to the medical condition of Crohn’s Disease that she suffers from and the fact that she is currently pregnant with a third child; due to give birth to that child sometime later this month. 

4. The question of whether the matter is to be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court is slightly complicated by the fact that it was initially commenced in the Federal Circuit Court and transferred by Judge Cassidy to this Court, there having been allegations of sexual abuse perpetrated against the female child made by the mother against the father.  That transfer no doubt was done by her Honour conscientiously considering the protocol that exists between the two Courts and considering that the matter raising sexual abuse allegations was better dealt with in this Court, potentially in its Magellan List. 

5. I am told this morning that the matter was initially in the Magellan List but has been removed from the Magellan List at some time in the past. Without knowing exactly, I can only presume that it was removed from the Magellan List because of the age of the allegations, they being now some four years old and the Magellan List being principally established for the early hearing and determination of sexual abuse allegations where that is possible. However, of course, that is becoming increasingly difficult having regard to the resourcing crisis that I consider the Court currently faces. 

6. The father does not appear this morning and his absence is not explained.  I am told by Mr Dooley, the Independent Children's Lawyer who appears, that the father has previously not appeared at Court events, although sometimes he does.  I understand that he is involved or has been involved in the mining industry in Queensland and has lived and worked in various parts of Queensland in the past including at some location requiring some round trip travel of about 2,000 kms to D Town where the mother and the children live, to see the children, albeit on a supervised basis at a contact centre in D Town. 

7. Mr Dooley makes submissions that the matter is not really ready for trial yet because of the fact that the last family report done by Mr E, an experienced family report writer known to the Court, was done in 2013 and that it might be appropriate for the Court that hears this matter to have the benefit of an updated report.  However, that is also said by Mr Dooley in circumstances where the father has not had any time with these children for some time and a submission by Mr Dooley that on the facts the Court might ultimately determine that the mother has been blocking, or at least not facilitating the provision of the children to spend time with the father pursuant to the interim arrangements.

8. Those of course are all matters for ultimate factual determination and I make no determination about them today.  The one thing I do determine is that the matter now being six years of age really does require finalisation one way or another.  It seems, from what I hear, that finalisation is only going to come about by judicial determination and conclusion of the proceedings. Whether that be on the father not appearing, as his non-appearance today suggests might potentially be an outcome, is another matter. 

9. I am of the view that the matter needs to be heard sooner, rather than later and in all the circumstances it is appropriate, notwithstanding the fact that the mother maintains the sex abuse allegations, to transfer the matter to the Federal Circuit Court for hearing in its circuit list in D Town.

10. The transfer is actually actively supported by the Independent Children’s Lawyer who nevertheless submits to the Court that ultimately he is likely to be taking the view and making submissions to the Court that there is nothing in the sexual abuse allegations, by that I mean that the Court might ultimately be persuaded that there is no unacceptable risk of sexual abuse to the children in the unsupervised care of the father. 

11. In those circumstances and the matter no longer being Magellan, I am satisfied that a Federal Circuit Court could quite readily and appropriately deal with this matter and that the hearing should take place in D Town and I order accordingly.

I certify that the preceding eleven (11) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Forrest delivered on 3 March 2016.

Associate:

Date:  29 March 2016