Suess & Jackson (Re-opening)

In the matter of *Suess & Jackson (Re-opening)*, Murphy J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application to reopen parenting proceedings concerning two children, V and B. The application was brought by the maternal grandmother, who sought to adduce evidence and file her own application for parenting orders.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the parenting proceedings, in which final orders had presumably been made, should be reopened to allow the maternal grandmother to participate and present her case. This involved considering the principles governing the reopening of final orders in family law matters, particularly in circumstances where a third party, such as a grandparent, seeks to be involved in parenting arrangements.

Murphy J, referencing High Court pronouncements on the admission of fresh evidence on appeal, adopted a statutory approach rather than a common law test. The court acknowledged that while finality in litigation is a relevant consideration, it is not paramount when the best interests of children are at stake. The judge noted that the High Court's emphasis on the remedial nature of provisions allowing for further evidence, aimed at preventing erroneous orders, was analogous to the present situation. Crucially, the court found that the grandmother's evidence, suggesting she was unaware of the earlier proceedings due to miscommunication and not a desire to abandon her rights, presented exceptional circumstances. The judge also highlighted the legislative framework governing parenting cases, particularly Division 12A of the Act, which mandates a focus on the best interests of the child.

Consequently, Murphy J ordered that the parenting proceedings be reopened to permit the maternal grandmother to adduce evidence and file an application. The parties were excused from complying with the Child Responsive Programme due to the exceptional circumstances. The matter was listed for trial before Justice Jordan on 27 March 2009, with provisions made for consent orders to be considered by chambers if an agreement was reached prior to the hearing.