FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SHERIF & SHERIF | [2012] FamCA 215 |
| FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN – with whom a child shall spend time and communicate – parental responsibility - where the father has been diagnosed with a personality disorder – where father has been admitted to psychiatric care at a mental health unit on an involuntary basis – father burned down the former matrimonial home – father’s homicidal ideation in relation to the children - where the paternal grandmother assisted the father during trial as a McKenzie Friend – children’s relationships with father significant but not as valuable as their relationships with the mother – definition of family violence - father’s aggressive behaviour constitutes family violence under the Act – presumption of equal shared parental responsibility rebutted – father poses deficient attitude to the responsibilities of parenthood – expert evidence that father’s personality disorder impairs his ability to prioritise the needs of the children over his own – father’s aggressive behaviour unlikely to be controlled by a supervisor – best interests of children – finding father poses an unacceptable risk of psychological harm and physical harm to the children – injunction granted restraining parties from permitting children to spend time and communicate with father – sole parental responsibility allocated to mother FAMILY LAW - PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – determining matrimonial asset pool – parties have a small pool of assets with the principal asset being the former matrimonial home – father’s arson damage to the former matrimonial home diminished its value – insurer refused to indemnify the parties against the damage – repair cost is the measurement of the diminution in its value – repair cost notionally added-back to the balance sheet against father’s share - issue of whether debt of the parties to maternal grandfather created in 1999 should be included within the balance sheet as a matrimonial liability – debt was statute barred – debt not included as matrimonial liability FAMILY LAW - PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – contributions – adjustments – just & equitable orders - – treatment of maternal grandfather’s loan to mother as a contribution for which she is entitled to full measure – where mother had superior contribution during cohabitation and since separation – mother’s entitlement assessed at 60 per cent and father’s at 40 per cent – parties in good physical health – mother is in part-time employment with modest income – father receives carer’s allowance being a full-time carer of the paternal grandmother – father contemplates searching for employment at some stage in the future – father to retain superannuation interests of relatively modest value – father’s superannuation interests worth triple the mother’s superannuation interest – mother will receive little or no child support from the father for the remainder of the children’s minority – in cases where the net pool is relatively modest preferable to express a third stage adjustment as a lump sum rather than percentage – cash adjustment to mother of entirety of father’s share |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 4,… |
Continue reading SHERIF & SHERIF
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- SHERIF & SHERIF [2012] FamCA 215
- Case
- [2012] FamCA 215
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility should be rebutted, and if so, to make orders regarding the children's best interests, including with whom they should spend time and communicate. In relation to property, the court needed to ascertain the matrimonial asset pool, considering the diminished value of the former matrimonial home due to the father's actions and the insurer's refusal to indemnify. The court also had to decide whether to include the statute-barred debt as a matrimonial liability and, ultimately, how to make a just and equitable division of the parties' assets and liabilities, taking into account their respective contributions and future financial circumstances.
In its reasoning, the court found that the father's aggressive behaviour constituted family violence under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and that his personality disorder impaired his ability to prioritise the children's needs. Expert evidence indicated that the father posed an unacceptable risk of psychological and physical harm to the children, leading the court to rebut the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. The court determined that the repair cost of the arson damage to the former matrimonial home should be notionally added back to the asset pool against the father's share, while the statute-barred debt to the maternal grandfather was excluded as a matrimonial liability. Considering the mother's superior contributions and the father's limited capacity to pay child support, the court adjusted the property settlement in the mother's favour.
The court ordered that all former parenting orders be discharged and that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children, with the children to live with her. The parties were restrained from permitting the children to spend time or communicate with the father, and the father was further restrained from approaching within 100 metres of the mother's residence or the children's schools. The former matrimonial home was ordered to be sold, with the net proceeds of sale, after costs and the discharge of the mortgage, to be paid to the mother. The mother was also declared the sole owner of any insurance monies received in respect of the fire damage. Each party was to retain other assets in their possession and be solely liable for their respective debts.
Orders
Orders of the court
Parenting Orders
1.
All former parenting orders relating to the following children (“the children”) are discharged:
(a) N, born … September 1999;
(b) B, born … October 2001; and
(c) R, born … December 2004.
2.
The mother shall have sole parental responsibility for the children.
3.
The children shall live with the mother.
4.
The parties are restrained from causing or permitting the children to spend time or communicate with the father.
5.
Pursuant to s 68B of the Family Law Act the father is restrained from entering upon or approaching within 100 metres of:
(a) The mother’s residence; and
(b) Any school attended by the children.
6.
The mother shall present the children to the Independent Children’s Lawyer at a time and place nominated by the Independent Children’s Lawyer within 14 days of the date of these orders at which time the Independent Children’s Lawyer shall explain these orders to the children.
7.
Pursuant to s 65DA(2) and s 62B of the Family Law Act, particulars of the obligations that these orders create, particulars of the consequences that may follow contravention of these orders, and details of assistance to comply with these orders are set out in the attached Fact Sheet, which forms part of these orders.
8.
The Independent Children’s Lawyer is discharged upon the expiration of any applicable appeal period.
Property Adjustment Orders
9.
The parties shall do all such acts and things and sign all such documents as may be necessary to list for sale by public auction the real property and improvements comprising Lot … on RP … County of …, Parish of …, being Title Reference …, and more commonly known as … T Street, Town A, Queensland, (“the property”).
10.
For the purposes of implementation of Order 9 hereof:
(a) The solicitors chosen by the mother shall be the solicitors to act on the sale of the property for the parties.
(b) The property shall be listed by the parties for auction sale within 6 weeks of the date of these orders.
(c) The auctioneer shall be the auctioneer chosen by the mother.
(d) The reserve price shall be the reserve price nominated by the auctioneer.
(e) In the event that the property is not sold by auction, or private negotiation within a further 7 days, then the property shall be submitted to successive auctions within further 6 weeks periods until sold, otherwise on the same terms and conditions as applied to the first auction.
(f) The parties are restrained from charging, mortgaging, or otherwise further encumbering the property.
11.
Upon completion of the sale of the realty pursuant to Orders 9 and 10 hereof the solicitors acting for the parties on the sale shall disburse the proceeds of sale as follows:
(a) Firstly, to pay all costs, commissions, and expenses of the sale and to pay any Council and water rates outstanding in respect of the property.
(b) Secondly, to discharge the mortgage registered over the property.
(c) Thirdly, to pay the balance then remaining to the mother.
12.
In the event of any payment out to the parties by the insurer of the property in respect of the damage sustained to the property by fire on or about 23 November 2010, the mother is declared the sole legal and beneficial owner (as between the parties) of such insurance monies and the father shall do all such acts and things as may be necessary to assign or transfer to the mother his right, title and interest in such monies.
13.
Unless otherwise provided:
(a) Each party shall be the sole legal and beneficial owner (as between the parties) of all other assets in their respective possession as at the date of these orders, and for that purpose bank accounts are deemed to be in the possession of the person named as the account holder and superannuation entitlements are deemed in the possession of the superannuant.
(b) Each party shall be solely liable for and shall indemnify the other against any and all debts attaching or relating to the property in their respective possession and any debts in their respective sole names.
Miscellaneous Orders
14.
Leave is granted to the mother to provide a sealed copy of these orders to the mortgagee of the property.
15.
In the event of either party refusing or neglecting to sign within 7 days of a written request to do so any document necessary to implement the terms of these orders the Registrar of the Family Court of Australia at Newcastle is empowered to execute such documents on behalf of the parties pursuant to s.106A of the Family Law Act.
16.
Any and all outstanding applications are dismissed.
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.