Snell and Snell & Ors (No 5)

Case

[2015] FamCA 420

1 June 2015


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Snell and Snell & Ors (No 5) [2015] FamCA 420 [2015] FamCA 420 1 June 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Snell and Snell & Ors (No 5)*, Kent J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning a child, B. The proceedings involved allegations of family violence, including gross physical assaults and coercive behaviour by the father, who also had an extensive criminal history and a history of alcohol and drug abuse. The mother had mental health issues. The father had opposed drug testing and psychiatric assessments, and refused to participate in the family report process, exhibiting conduct described as extraordinary throughout the proceedings.

The court was required to determine whether the parents had adequately addressed their respective issues of alcohol/drug dependence and psychiatric concerns, and whether any orders for the child to spend time and communicate with the father would pose an unacceptable risk. Further issues included the father's applications for the discharge of the Independent Children's Lawyer and for the Justice to recuse himself for bias. The court also had to consider the allocation of parental responsibility and the child's best interests in light of the history of family violence and the father's conduct.

Kent J dismissed the father's applications for recusal and discharge of the Independent Children's Lawyer, finding no merit in them. The court found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted, and it was in the child's best interests for the mother to have sole parental responsibility for major long-term decisions. The court discharged all previous parenting orders and made new orders for the child to live with the mother. Significant orders were made to manage the reintroduction of the father into the child's life, including supervision by family consultants, specific conditions on time and communication, and injunctions restraining the father from publishing details of the proceedings online. The court also imposed injunctions on both parents regarding denigration of the other parent and communication methods.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Equity & Trusts

Legal Concepts

  • Injunction

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Remedies

  • Standing

  • Costs

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

2

Statutory Material Cited

0

Sayer v Radcliffe [2012] FamCAFC 209
MRR v GR [2010] HCA 4