Swefford v Tarbell & Anor Swefford v Tarbell

[2013] HCASL 146

SWEFFORD

v

TARBELL & ANOR

SWEFFORD

v

TARBELL & ANOR

[2013] HCASL 146
S35/2013
S36/2013

1. Since February 2008, the applicant and first respondent have been involved in parenting proceedings in the Family Court of Australia concerning their son ("the child").  After the applicant removed the child from Australia in April 2008, the Family Court made an ex parte order that the child live with the first respondent.  When the child and applicant were returned to Australia in 2011, interim orders were made giving the applicant supervised contact with the child.

2. On 22 November 2011, the Family Court (Loughnan J) continued those interim orders.  On 2 February 2012, Loughnan J made an order dismissing the applicant's request to amend the interim orders by removing the supervision requirement, or by altering the place of supervised contact.  There had been no change of circumstance to warrant such amendments.

3. On 13 June 2012, the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia (Coleman, May and Rees JJ) dismissed appeals against both of Loughnan J's orders.  Loughnan J's reasons were not affected by any material factual error, and their Honours were satisfied that Loughnan J had considered the best interests of the child in continuing the interim orders.Further, the order made on 2 February 2012 was reasonably open to Loughnan J in the context of an interlocutory hearing.  As a result of concessions made by the applicant's counsel, it was unnecessary for their Honours to consider the allegation made in the applicant's notice of appeal that she had been denied procedural fairness.

4. The applicant requires an extension of time to file her applications for special leave to appeal to this Court.  The grounds of appeal do not rise above disagreement with factual findings made on an interim basis, pending final parenting orders.  No question of principle falls for determination.  An extension of time should not be granted in either application.

5. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing each application.

S.M. Kiefel
4 September 2013 P.A. Keane