Sandler and Adams

[2008] FamCA 896

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SANDLER & ADAMS [2008] FamCA 896

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom children spend time – Grandparents

APPLICANT: Ms Sandler

RESPONDENT: Mr and Mrs Adams

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

FILE NUMBER: NCC 1118 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 3 October 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Newcastle

PLACE HEARD: Newcastle

JUDGMENT OF: COHEN J

HEARING DATE: 3 October 2008

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms Clarke

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Guyder

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mr Gorton

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Orders

1. I order that the grandparents be entitled to telephone the children at their mother's home and speak to them for so long as the children feel willing to speak to their grandparents between 7.30 pm and 8 pm each Wednesday.

2. I order the third Saturday of each calendar month, except for December when I will make it the fourth Saturday, the grandparents shall have contact with the children from 10.30 am on Saturday until 6 pm on the following Sunday with changeovers to take place to coincide with the beginning and end of each contact period at McDonalds, N, which I am told and think is reasonable to assume is at the approximate halfway point between the grandparents and mother's homes.

3. I discharge all orders which are inconsistent with my orders.

4. I order that the father is to be entitled to have telephone contact with the children each Monday and Thursday between 7.30 pm and 8 pm, and the mother is to make them available in the event that he calls, however I will grant to the mother the entitlement to listen to all telephone conversations between the father and the children by use of a loud speaker system in the telephone.

5. I will further restrain the grandparents from permitting the father to see the children unless immediately out of the presence of the grandparents.

6. I will discharge all orders about parental urine testing.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT NEWCASTLE

FILE NUMBER: NCC 1118  of 2008

MS SANDLER

Applicant

And

MR AND MRS ADAMS

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Ex-Tempore

1. This matter was brought before me as a matter of urgency.  I have considered all of the matters which the Act requires me to consider.  Time does not permit me to deliver reasons which state those considerations because of the urgency of the matter before me and the other matters in my list.  I think it is in the children's best interests, on an overall basis that they spend some time with their paternal grandparents.

2. I note that there is a suggestion in the evidence I have read that the maternal grandmother is a balancing and positive influence for the children.  There is no suggestion with the paternal grandparents that they are other than loving and dutiful, responsible grandparents.  In those circumstances, the mother agrees that it is appropriate that the children should spend time with the paternal grandparents.  Her only reservations are that the grandparents may not know the children well enough for immediate time and about the distance between the children's current home with their mother and the grandparent's home at S, which is about five and a half hours drive from the mother's home in the Newcastle suburbs.

3. I have read all of the affidavit evidence.  It appears to me that it would be appropriate for these children and in their best interests to spend one weekend a month with the paternal grandparents despite the difficulties with transport.  I also think that the children should speak to their grandparents once a week. The mother has nominated a time between 7.30 and 8.00 pm each Wednesday.  I regard that as appropriate.

4. In relation to face to face contact; it has also been put to me that there is a problem with religion in that the children have been brought up as Catholics by agreement between the mother and father, but that the grandparents are members of a different Christian faith, a more fundamentalist one in which the grandfather is a senior figure. 

5. This Court does not regard one religion as superior to another provided it does not involve teachings which bring harm upon others.

6. In this particular instance there is no basis for regarding one religion as better than the other as conducted by the parties to these proceedings, but in order to avoid the children being confused by being confronted by two sets of religious teachings which are, to them, likely to be confusing because of inconsistencies in practices, I think it is appropriate, until further order, to restrain the paternal grandparents during any period when they spend face to face time with the children from teaching them in relation to any religious matters or exposing them to any religious practices apart from Grace before meals.  I shall make an order making that restraint.

...

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cohen.

Associate: 

Date: