Starkey and Starkey

[2013] FamCA 99

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

STARKEY & STARKEY [2013] FamCA 99

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – with whom a child spends time – where the trial was adjourned part heard – best interests – orders for the children to spend supervised time with the father pending completion of the trial.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Starkey

RESPONDENT: Mr Starkey

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mr Childs

FILE NUMBER: ADC 1167 of 2009

DATE DELIVERED: 19 February 2013

PLACE DELIVERED: Adelaide

PLACE HEARD: Adelaide

JUDGMENT OF: Dawe J

HEARING DATE: 19 February 2013

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: n/a

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: In Person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Lewis

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: R J Cole & Partners

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Mr Childs

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Alderman Redman

Orders

1. The father spend further supervised time with the children at the B Contact Centre (“the Contact Centre”) on 23 February 2013 and such other further visits as the Contact Centre can accommodate and request the Contact Centre advise the parties in writing.

1. The Contact Centre if possible to provide a further report for all visits that have taken place between the father and the children that have occurred since the last visit on 22 December 2012.

1. The father shall attend one supervised drug testing session as requested by the Independent Children’s Lawyer PROVIDED THAT he attend within twenty-four [24] hours of the request from the Independent Children’s Lawyer being made to his solicitors.

1. Further consideration of the matter is adjourned part heard to 10.00 am on Tuesday 2 April 2013;  Wednesday 3 April 2013;  Thursday 4 April 2013 and Tuesday 7 May 2013 for closing submissions.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT ADELAIDE

FILE NUMBER: ADC 1167 of 2009

Ms Starkey

Applicant

And

Mr Starkey

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. I am being asked to make orders by the Independent Children’s Lawyer’s counsel.  The orders that I am being asked to make are to continue the supervised time after the arranged date on 23 February 2013 (which is already in place according to the orders) for the contact centre to provide updated report for all visits including the visit of 22 December 2012, until the resumption of the trial and to order the father to attend supervised drug testing within 24 hours of a request by the Independent Children’s Lawyer to the father’s solicitors.  The father does not oppose those orders.  The mother does not oppose them save and except she opposes any more supervised time between the father and the children after 23 February visit.  She does so on the basis that it is upsetting for the children and it is “interfering with our life.”  

2. The Court is not in a position yet to determine all of the matters which would necessarily relate to the best interests of the children but the primary considerations are to give consideration to the benefit of the children having a meaningful relationship with each of the child’s parents as well as protecting them from abuse. 

3. I have had the benefit of reading not only the reports of Mr L, the Social Worker, but have just heard his evidence.  I also have before me the affidavit which sets out the summary of the reports from the contact centre. 

4. Without drawing any conclusions from those matters and pending the conclusion of the trial, I consider it significant that one of the factors is the benefit to the children of having a meaningful relationship with each of the parents.

5. The contact centre provides arrangements whereby the children’s physical welfare, as well as, to a large extent, their emotional and psychological welfare is protected and gives an opportunity for the Court to be informed about the ongoing relationship between the father and the children, even if it is in a somewhat restricted setting. 

6. In relation to the mother’s concern that the matters are upsetting the children and interfering in the children’s lives, these are factors which will have to be balanced when I have considered all of the evidence and am able to make a final decision. 

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Dawe delivered on 19 February 2013.

Associate: 

Date:  21 February 2013