Surrey and Surrey

[2009] FamCA 356

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SURREY & SURREY [2009] FamCA 356

FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Consent orders

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Surrey

RESPONDENT: Mr Surrey

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

FILE NUMBER: MLC 1193 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 4 May 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE CRONIN

HEARING DATE: 4 May 2009

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: MR LAMPE, LAMPE FAMILY LAWYERS

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: MR GODDARD, GODDARD ELLIOTT

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: MR MULVANY, T J MULVANY & CO

Orders

1. That BY CONSENT there be orders in accordance with the minutes of proposed orders marked Exhibit “A” sealed and attached hereto AND IT IS DIRECTED that such minutes remain upon the Court file.

2. That the solicitor for the wife engross the minutes and deliver them by electronic transmission to my Associate within 7 days.

3. That pursuant to s.65DA(2) and s.62B, the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these orders and details of who can assist parties adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

4. That all outstanding parenting applications be adjourned to 12 noon on 6 November 2009 in the Registrar’s Direction List.

5. That the letter from AMP Society concerning the superannuation orders is marked Exhibit “B”.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Surrey & Surrey is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 1193 of 2008

MS SURREY

Applicant

And

MR SURREY

Respondent

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This matter was listed this morning by telephone. The parties had sent in minutes.

2. These are property and parenting issues.  Final orders have now been made in relation to the property matters and the parties are trialling parenting orders relating to the two children.  I have adjourned that issue to 6 November 2009 at 12 noon in the Registrar’s Directions List.

3. In relation to the property matter, the parties have modest assets.  They told me that they worked diligently with solicitors and counsel last week at a round table conference and concluded an agreement which effectively represents about 60 per cent to the wife and 40 per cent to the husband.  Having regard to all of the financial material on the file that I have read and looking at how those orders affect each party in the future, I am satisfied that they are just and equitable in all of the circumstances.

4. In relation to the parenting matters, whilst there were some initial unpleasant scenes at separation including what might be described as rude and aggressive behaviour, the parties have indicated that those matters have abated and that what they are now all focussing on is the trialling of parenting orders.  That was necessary having regard to the age of their youngest child.  Accordingly, and with the support of the Independent Children’s Lawyer Mr Mulvany, I am content to say that there are no risk factors involved in this case for the children and that these orders are in their best interests.

I certify that the preceding Four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin

Associate: 

Date:  6 May 2009