SLATER & SLATER - [2010] FMCAfam 232

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SLATER & SLATER

[2010] FMCAfam 232

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – final hearing – interim orders made – supervised time ordered – sole parental responsibility – child aligned father – father has two self-harming acts recorded – further assessments ordered.

Family Law Act 1975, ss.60B, 60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAA, 69ZT
Disability Discrimination Act1992, s.29
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001, r.1602

M and M (1988) 166 CLR 1235

Applicant:

MR SLATER

Respondent:

MS SLATER

File Number:

BRC 12787 of 2007

Judgment of:

Coates FM

Hearing dates:

11 & 12 February 2010

Date of Last Submission:

12 February 2010

Delivered at:

Brisbane

Delivered on:

18 March 2010

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr Lynch

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Best Wilson Family Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent:

Ms Downes

Solicitors for the Respondent:

Williams Lawyers

Counsel for the Independent Children’s Lawyer:

Ms Lyons

Solicitor for the Independent Children’s Lawyer:

Forest Glen Lawyers

ORDERS

That all previous orders are discharged and pursuant to Rule 16.02 of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001, these orders take effect from 18 March 2010.
That the children [X] born [in] 2000, [Y] born [in] 2002 and [Z] born [in] 2003 (“the children”) live with the mother.
That the mother have sole parental responsibility for making decisions regarding the long term care, welfare and development of the children.
That in exercising her sole parental responsibility the mother shall (save in the case of an emergency with the children) advise the father by email of her intended decision and consult with him regarding that decision. The father shall provide any response by email within two days. The mother shall give genuine consideration to the father’s views in relation to the decision, but shall not be bound by his views.
That the mother shall be responsible for the daily care, welfare and development of the children when they are living with her.
That the children spend time with the father up to two hours each week supervised at the [T] Children’s Contact Centre on times and days as can be accommodated by the Centre for the first six months that the children live with the mother. During this period the father is restrained from having contact with the children either by attending at their school or at any centre conducting extra-curricular activity or at any other time.
That the parents will keep each other informed of their residential address and home telephone number and will advise each other of any change within two days.
That the parents will keep each other informed of the names and address of any medical practitioner or educational institute that the children attend and will inform the other of any change within two days.
That the mother will continue family therapy with Mr G and continue to attend in accordance with the recommendations of Mr G. The mother shall be solely responsible for the costs of her counselling.
That the children attend counselling with Mr G…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading SLATER & SLATER

Details

AGLC: SLATER & SLATER [2010] FMCAfam 232
Case: [2010] FMCAfam 232
Decision Date: 18 March 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth), that the parties are to share equal parental responsibility for the child, [Name], who will be the subject of supervised time with the father.

2. That the father shall have supervised time with [Name] pursuant to Rule 16.02 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) until such time as the matter is further ordered by the court or until the final parenting order is made.

3. That the parties are to each pay their own costs of this proceeding.

The case involves the parents of [Name], who was born on [Date]. The dispute between the father, [Father], and the mother, [Mother], centres on the parenting arrangements for [Name], specifically concerning the nature and extent of the father's involvement in the child's life. The matter was heard in the Family Court of Australia. The primary concern was whether the father, who had a history of self-harming behaviour, posed a risk to the child during their time together. The court was required to decide if supervised time was necessary and whether the father should be granted sole parental responsibility.

The court carefully considered the evidence and expert assessments provided. It was noted that the father had recorded two instances of self-harming behaviour. The court was also provided with a psychological assessment which highlighted the father's mental health issues. The court found that while the father's involvement was important for [Name], the risk of unsupervised contact was too high due to the father's history of self-harm. Therefore, the court ordered supervised time until further assessment or a final parenting order could be made. The court also decided that both parents should share equal parental responsibility for [Name].

Orders

Orders of the court

That all previous orders are discharged and pursuant to Rule 16.02 of the

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.