ROGERS & LENARD (No.3) - [2010] FMCAfam 839

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ROGERS & LENARD (No.3)

[2010] FMCAfam 839

FAMILY LAW – Children – parenting orders – interim orders – further orders after consent orders – time spent by the children with the father on weekdays and weekends during school term time.

Family Law Act 1975, ss.60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAA

Rogers & Lenard [2010] FMCAfam 764
Rogers & Lenard (No.2) [2010] FMCAfam 830
Goode & Goode [2006] FamCA 1346; (2006) FLC 93-286

Applicant:

MR ROGERS

Respondent:

MS LENARD

File Number:

SYC 1585 of 2010

Judgment of:

Scarlett FM

Hearing date:

5 August 2010

Date of Last Submission:

5 August 2010

Delivered at:

Sydney

Delivered on:

6 August 2010

REPRESENTATION

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Mr Sweeney

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Sweeney Tiggemann

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Mrs Green

Solicitors for the Respondent:

Streeterlaw

ORDERS UNTIL FURTHER ORDER

The children [X] born 2003 and [Y] born 2005 are to spend time with the Applicant Father during school term time as follows:
(a)From 3:00pm each Tuesday until 9:00am on Wednesday; and
(b)Each alternate weekend from 12:00 noon on Saturday until 6:00pm on Sunday commencing on Saturday 7 August 2010.
For the purposes of Order 1(a) the Father will collect the said children from their school on the Tuesday afternoon and return the children to their school on the Wednesday morning.
For the purposes of Order 1(b) the Father will collect the said children from the Mother and return them to the Mother at the [shopping centre omitted] at [R] New South Wales outside the front of the Woolworths store.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Order 1(b), if Mother’s Day should fall on a Sunday when the children would otherwise be spending time with the Father, then the children will not spend time with the Father on that weekend but will spend time with the Father on the following weekend instead.
The Father is to do all things necessary to ensure that the children are taken to and from any ballet class or sporting commitment or social engagement that is to take place during the periods that the children are spending time with him in accordance with these orders.

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

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
Sydney

SYC 1585 of 2010

MR ROGERS

Applicant

And

MS LENARD

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Applicant

This is another application for interim orders relating to the parties’ two daughters, [X] and [Y], who are 6 years and 10 months and 5 years of age. The parties have agreed to consent orders that provide that:
a)They should have shared parental responsibility for the children;
b)The children should live with the Mother;
c)The parties should communicate by telephone with the girls when they are in the care of the other parent;
d)The children would spend defined school holiday time with the Father; and
e)There would be special arrangements for Christmas and…

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 ROGERS & LENARD (No.3)

Details

AGLC: ROGERS & LENARD (No.3) [2010] FMCAfam 839
Case: [2010] FMCAfam 839
Decision Date: 6 August 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Rogers and Lenard were involved in a dispute concerning parenting arrangements for their children. The case reached the Family Court of Australia, where the primary concern was the amount of time the children would spend with the father during school term time, both on weekdays and weekends. The parents had previously entered into consent orders but later sought further orders to adjust these arrangements.

The court was tasked with determining whether the existing consent orders should be modified and, if so, how the new arrangements should be structured. This involved considering the best interests of the children, including their emotional and educational needs, as well as the parents' respective roles and responsibilities. The court also had to assess the evidence presented regarding the children's current living situation and the impact of the proposed changes.

The court carefully evaluated the submissions and evidence from both parties. It concluded that the best interests of the children would be served by altering the existing arrangements. The court considered factors such as the children's age, their relationship with each parent, and the impact of the changes on their stability and well-being. After weighing these considerations, the court decided to modify the consent orders to provide a more balanced and suitable arrangement for the children's time with the father during school term time.

The court issued new orders that adjusted the amount of time the children would spend with the father on weekdays and weekends. These orders aimed to ensure that the children's needs were met while also recognising the father's role in their lives. The final orders provided a detailed schedule that balanced the parents' respective contributions and the children's best interests.

Orders