Salt and Salt

[2018] FamCA 259

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SALT & SALT [2018] FamCA 259

FAMILY LAW – SINGLE EXPERT – application to adduce evidence from further expert – purpose of expert witness provisions-application of Rule 15.49 and the concept of “a substantial body of opinion contrary to any opinion given by the single expert witness” - significance of the issue in the proceedings 

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) rr 1.04, 15.42, 15.49

APPLICANT: Ms Salt

RESPONDENT: Mr Salt

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Jeanine Lloyd & Associates

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1754 of 2016

DATE DELIVERED: 26 April 2018

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Gill J

HEARING DATE: 5 April 2018

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:	Dobinson Davey Clifford Simpson

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:	Ms M Davis
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:	Infinity Legal

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mrs J Lloyd

Orders

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The mother has leave to adduce expert evidence from Dr L.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1754 of 2016

Ms Salt

Applicant

And

Mr Salt

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The context of the current Application in a Case is that it falls within parenting proceedings concerning the parties’ child H, now aged three and a half.  A primary issue in the case concerns whether or not the father presents as a risk of sexual abuse to H.  In relation to that issue the mother filed an Application in a Case on 16 February 2018 seeking leave to rely upon evidence from a psychiatrist, Dr L.  This application is made in a context where a Single Expert has already been appointed by the agreement of the parties, a psychologist, Professor M. 

2. Part 15.5 of the Rules sets out the provisions dealing with the reception of expert evidence.  Those Rules are subject to the overriding Rules contained at Chapter 1 which have as their main purpose:

   1.04     Main Purpose of Rules

   The main purpose of these Rules is to ensure that each case is resolved in a just and timely manner at a cost to the parties and the court that is reasonable in the circumstances of the case.

3. Against that background the purpose of the expert evidence provisions are set out as:

   15.42  Purpose of Part 15.5

   The purpose of this Part is:

   (a)to ensure that parties obtain expert evidence only in relation to a significant issue in dispute;

   (b)to…