Swefford and Tarbell (No 2)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Swefford (the mother) to the Family Court of Australia, seeking certain orders on an *ex parte* basis, meaning without notice to the other party, Mr Tarbell (the father). The Independent Children's Lawyer, Mr Christaki, was also involved. The dispute centred on two interim applications made by the mother: one seeking the intervention of the NSW Department of Family and Community Services to assess the welfare of the child, D Tarbell, and the second seeking urgent psychological medical assistance and assessment for the father.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether it should grant the mother's applications on an *ex parte* basis. This required the Court to consider the Family Law Rules, which permit orders to be made in the absence of a party, but only if the Court is satisfied as to why an early hearing with notice would not be more appropriate and why an order should be made without notice to the other party. The Court also had to determine if the matters raised by the mother were sufficiently serious and recent to justify such extraordinary steps.

Justice Watts found that the mother's counsel had focused on the merits of the applications rather than justifying the *ex parte* nature of the request. The Court noted that the first application, concerning the Department's intervention, should not be decided without hearing from the Independent Children's Lawyer, who might offer valuable assistance. Regarding the second application for the father's assessment, the Court observed that the father had already been assessed by one psychiatrist and was scheduled for further assessment. His Honour concluded that none of the matters presented by the mother were sufficiently serious or recent to warrant making orders without hearing from the father and the Independent Children's Lawyer.

Consequently, the Court dismissed the mother's first application, which sought to deal with the interim applications on an *ex parte* basis. The mother's other applications were to be listed for a future hearing on 9 August 2012, and she was ordered to serve the application and supporting affidavit on the father's lawyers and the Independent Children's Lawyer as soon as practicable.