South and Pritchard - [2017] FamCA 62

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH & PRITCHARD

[2017] FamCA 62

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – best interests- where the mother seeks sole parental responsibility and for the children to spend no time with the father – where the father seeks equal shared parental responsibility and for one child to live with him – where the father has consistently failed to attend supervised time with the children – where the father has not complied with relevant Orders and trial directions - where the father is unable to protect the children from his views and belief system – where the father poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – where the children are to spend no time with the father

Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Baghti & Baghti [2015] FamCAFC 71
Banks & Banks (2015) FLC 93-637
Goode & Goode (2006) FLC 93-286
Re: H & Ors (1996) 1 All ER 1
M & M (1988) 166 CLR 69
Moose & Moose (2008) FLC 93-375
In the Marriage of N & S (1996) FLC 92-655
SCVG & KLD (2014) FLC 93-582

APPLICANT:

Mr South

RESPONDENT:

Ms Pritchard

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Jan Kingston

FILE NUMBER:

BRC

9848

2013

DATE DELIVERED:

10 February 2017

PLACE DELIVERED:

Brisbane

PLACE HEARD:

Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF:

Carew J

HEARING DATE:

1 February 2017

REPRESENTATION

FOR THE APPLICANT:

Self-represented

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Mr George

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

James & Co. Lawyers

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Ms McArdle

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Legal Aid Queensland

Orders

Ms Pritchard (“the mother”) shall have sole parental responsibility for B born … 2003 and C born … 2005 (“the children”).
The children shall live with the mother and spend no time with the father.
All previous orders are discharged and all extant applications are dismissed.
The Independent Children’s Lawyer is discharged.
Pursuant to section 65DA(2) and section 62B, the particulars of the obligations this Order creates and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes this Order, and details of who can assist parties adjust to and comply with this Order are set out in the fact sheet attached hereto. These particulars are included in this Order.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym South & Pritchard has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRC 9848 of 2013

Mr South

Applicant

And

Ms Pritchard

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Mr South (“the father”) and Ms…

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 South and Pritchard

Details

AGLC: South and Pritchard [2017] FamCA 62
Case: [2017] FamCA 62
Decision Date: 10 February 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *South and Pritchard*, heard before Carew J, the dispute concerned parental responsibility and living arrangements for two children, B and C. The mother sought sole parental responsibility and orders that the children live with her and spend no time with the father.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in relation to their living arrangements and parental responsibility, considering the evidence presented by the parties.

Carew J ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children. The court further ordered that the children live with the mother and spend no time with the father. All previous orders were discharged, and all extant applications were dismissed. The Independent Children’s Lawyer was also discharged. The court noted that particulars of the obligations created by the order, the consequences of contravention, and details of assistance available to parties were set out in an attached fact sheet, forming part of the order.

Orders

Orders of the court

Ms Pritchard (“the mother”) shall have sole parental responsibility for B born … 2003 and C born … 2005 (“the children”).

The children shall live with the mother and spend no time with the father.

All previous orders are discharged and all extant applications are dismissed.

The Independent Children’s Lawyer is discharged.

Pursuant to section 65DA(2) and section 62B, the particulars of the obligations this Order creates and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes this Order, and details of who can assist parties adjust to and comply with this Order are set out in the fact sheet attached hereto. These particulars are included in this Order.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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.