TANBERG & REMMY

[2020] FCCA 3175

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TANBERG & REMMY [2020] FCCA 3175

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Parenting – interim hearing – limited issues – previous agreement between parents for shared care arrangement for young child – limited utility of expert report which did not comment on any relevant risks to the child in the shared care arrangement continuing and did not recommend that the current shared care arrangement cease – Application by Mother to change shared care not accepted due to inconclusive evidence – other stressors not addressed in much detail such as the Father’s new partner and the tense relationship between her and the Mother.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), Part VII

Cases cited:

Goode v Goode (2007) 36 Fam LR 422

Applicant: MS TANBERG

Respondent: MR REMMY

File Number: CAC 2420 of 2019

Judgment of: Judge WJ Neville

Hearing date: 12 October 2020

Date of Last Submission: 12 October 2020

Delivered at: Canberra

Delivered on: 12 October 2020

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms M. Davis

Solicitors for the Applicant: Alliance Legal Services

Solicitors for the Respondent: Farrar Gesini Dunn

NOTATIONS

A.As a matter of evidence, there was insufficient material for the Court to rely on in order to make any changes to the existing consent Orders;

B.In particular, the expert report of Mr B is either inconclusive and/or does not directly address the issue of the potential positive and/or negative impact of a shared care arrangement in relation to the child, X (born: in 2017);

C.It is highly unusual to have a shared care arrangement for a young child, but for a number of reasons, some being pragmatic considerations, the parties agreed upon a shared care arrangement in December 2019; accordingly,

ORDERS

1. No later than 12:00pm on 16 October 2020 the parties are to jointly notify the Court via email to [e-mail] as to whether:

   (a)A Final Hearing in this matter could be contained to 1 day; and

   (b)Whether the parties intend to obtain a further private expert report or a s62G report ahead of the Final Hearing.

2. The matter be listed for Final Hearing on a date and time to be advised by the Court.

NOTATION IN CHAMBERS

D.The Court is amenable to making a s.62G Order for a full Family Report. In the Courts’ view, not only would this save the parties money but also, given how long it will be until a Final Hearing can occur, it is likely to be of particular benefit to have “a different set of expert eyes.”

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT CANBERRA

CAC 2420 of 2019

MS TANBERG

Applicant

And

MR REMMY

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. The following reasons have been revised from the transcript of the ex tempore judgment that was delivered on 12^th October 2020.  They have become necessary because the Mother has recently lodged an appeal…