Sheenan and Laumea

Case

[2017] FamCA 719

15 September 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Sheenan and Laumea [2017] FamCA 719 [2017] FamCA 719 15 September 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned parenting orders for five children, B, C, D, E, and F, born between 2008 and 2013. The dispute involved the father and mother of the children, and the proceedings were before Gill J. The court was required to determine the living arrangements for the children and the extent of each parent's responsibilities and time with them.

The court was tasked with determining the primary residence of the children and the allocation of parental responsibility. It also needed to establish a detailed schedule for the father's time with the children, including specific periods and durations, and to address the mother's sole parental responsibility. Furthermore, the court had to consider provisions for communication between the parents regarding the children's schooling and medical care, as well as impose specific restraints on the parents' conduct.

Gill J ordered the discharge of all previous parenting orders. The children were to live with their mother, who was granted sole parental responsibility. The father's time with the children was to be phased in over several stages, commencing with limited contact and gradually increasing to alternate weekends and specific holiday periods. The orders also stipulated that changeovers were to occur at designated locations, and both parents were authorised to obtain information directly from the children's schools. Crucially, the father was restrained from physical discipline, discussing proceedings with the children, and bathing, showering, or sleeping in the same bed with them. The court also mandated specific communication protocols for medical emergencies and the exchange of contact details. The appointment of an Independent Children's Lawyer was extended for six months to facilitate the implementation of these orders.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

Legal Concepts

  • Consent

  • Injunction

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Remedies

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0

M v M [1988] HCA 68