SAFFERY & SALBER

Case [2020] FCCA 1902

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SAFFERY & SALBER [2020] FCCA 1902
Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Gathering evidence on an urgent basis – hearing conducted by telephone due to COVID-19 pandemic – interim care arrangements for a young child – parenting arrangements – best interests of the child – allegations of risk to the child in the mother’s care – where the father presents the child to a medical professional on each occasion that the child is in his care – considerations under section 60CC.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.60B, 60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAA

Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW)

Cases cited:

Re A (Children) (Remote Hearing: Care and Placement Orders) [2020] EWCA Civ 583

Re B (Children)(Remote Hearing: Interim Care Order) [2020] EWCA Civ 584

Capic & Ford Motor Company of Australia Ltd (Adjournment) [2020] FCA 486

Gordon & Gordon [2015] FamCA 616

Johns & Jasapas [2016] FamCA 471

Harridge & Harridge [2010] FamCA 445

Keats & Keats [2016] FamCAFC 156

SS v AH [2010] FamCAFC 13

Goode & Goode (2006) FLC 93-286

Marvel& Marvel (No.2) [2010] FamCAFC 101

Lansa & Clovelly [2010] FamCA 80
Applicant: MS SAFFERY
Respondent: MR SALBER
File Number: PAC 5422 of 2017
Judgment of: Judge Harman
Hearing date: 5 June 2020
Date of Last Submission: 5 June 2020
Delivered at: Parramatta
Delivered on: 5 June 2020

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Ms Alam of Kathryn Renshall Lawyers
Solicitors for the Respondent: Mr Buckley of Thexton Lawyers
Counsel for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Mr Blank

ORDERS

  1. Suspend all prior parenting orders with respect to the child X born in 2014.

  2. Pending further Order, X shall live with his mother Ms Saffery.

  3. Pending further Order, Ms Saffery shall have sole parental responsibility for major issues decisions with respect to X born in 2014.

  4. Pending further order, X shall communicate with his father by FaceTime or similar video call facility not less than three (3) times per week as agreed between the parents or, failing agreement, each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday between 7.00pm and 7:30pm, with the father to initiate the call and with the mother to ensure that X is available in that period of time, that her phone is switched on and available to receive video calls and enable X to speak with his father.

  5. Pending further Order, X shall spend time with his father on a supervised basis as agreed between the parties and/or as directed by the Independent Children’s Lawyer, including but not limited to time and/or communication at any Contact Centre that can facilitate time (whether face-to-face or by other means) or by utilising a private agency such as Connecting Families.

  6. Note: The Court is advised that Connecting Families is available to provide face-to-face supervised visits in or about the City B area in two weeks or so and such periods should commence provided they are affordable to the parties and the Independent Children’s Lawyer supports and directs that it be so.

  7. X shall be…

Continue reading SAFFERY & SALBER

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
SAFFERY & SALBER [2020] FCCA 1902
Case
[2020] FCCA 1902
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In SAFFERY & SALBER, heard by Judge Harman, the dispute concerned urgent interim care arrangements for a young child, X, born in 2014. The hearing was conducted by telephone due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The father had raised allegations of risk to the child in the mother's care, noting that he presented the child to a medical professional on each occasion the child was in his care.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child in light of these allegations and the prevailing circumstances, considering the factors outlined in section 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). This involved balancing the need for immediate protection with the child's right to maintain a relationship with both parents.

The court reasoned that suspending prior parenting orders was necessary to implement new interim arrangements. It applied the paramount consideration of the child's best interests, which led to orders for X to live with his mother and for the mother to have sole parental responsibility for major decisions. The court also made specific provisions for communication between X and his father via video call and for supervised time with the father, acknowledging the need for professional supervision and the potential availability of services like Connecting Families.

The court ordered the suspension of all prior parenting orders and that, pending further order, X shall live with his mother, Ms Saffery, who would have sole parental responsibility for major issue decisions. X was to communicate with his father via video call at least three times per week, and spend time with his father on a supervised basis as agreed or directed by the Independent Children’s Lawyer. X was to be delivered to the mother at a specified location the following day, and the matter was adjourned for further mention and directions.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

Suspend all prior parenting orders with respect to the child X born in 2014.

2.

Pending further Order, X shall live with his mother Ms Saffery.

3.

Pending further Order, Ms Saffery shall have sole parental responsibility for major issues decisions with respect to X born in 2014.

4.

Pending further order, X shall communicate with his father by FaceTime or similar video call facility not less than three (3) times per week as agreed between the parents or, failing agreement, each Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday between 7.00pm and 7:30pm, with the father to initiate the call and with the mother to ensure that X is available in that period of time, that her phone is switched on and available to receive video calls and enable X to speak with his father.

5.

Pending further Order, X shall spend time with his father on a supervised basis as agreed between the parties and/or as directed by the Independent Children’s Lawyer, including but not limited to time and/or communication at any Contact Centre that can facilitate time (whether face-to-face or by other means) or by utilising a private agency such as Connecting Families.

6.

Note: The Court is advised that Connecting Families is available to provide face-to-face supervised visits in or about the City B area in two weeks or so and such periods should commence provided they are affordable to the parties and the Independent Children’s Lawyer supports and directs that it be so.

7.

X shall be delivered to the mother at MacDonald’s City B 12.00noon tomorrow 6 June 2020.

8.

The matter is adjourned for further mention and directions to 21 August 2020 at 10:30am.

9.

Note: The purpose of the adjournment is to enable the above arrangements to go into effect and for an application to be made by the Independent Children’s Lawyer for the funding of a Part 15 Report and, if possible, a minute of order to be drafted and circulated to provide for such a Report.

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.