Theodore & Ambrose

Case [2022] FedCFamC2F 1619


FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 2)

Theodore & Ambrose [2022] FedCFamC2F 1619

File number(s): DUC 105 of 2022
Judgment of: JUDGE OBRADOVIC
Date of judgment: 24 November 2022
Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – Interim Parenting – short form reasons – where final consent orders made in 2019 – father engaged in criminal activity – assessment of risk – best interest of child – parental responsibility – child to spend gradually increasing time with father – orders for drug testing.
Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss.60CC, 69ZL
Cases cited:

1           Beaton & Beaton [2020] FamCAFC 297

Goode v Goode [2006] FamCA 1346

Isles v Nelissen [2022] FedCFamC1A 97

2           Keats & Keats [2016] FamCAFC 156

Division: Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs: 47
Date of hearing: 22 November 2022
Place: Parramatta
Counsel for the Applicant:  Ms Otrebski
Solicitors for the Applicant:  Richard Wise Solicitor
Appearing for the Respondent:  Mr Virgona
Solicitors for the Respondent:  Mastronardi Legal
Appearing for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Ms Hughes
Solicitors for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Hughes And Co Lawyers And Conveyancing

ORDERS

DUC 105 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS THEODORE

Applicant

AND:

MR AMBROSE

Respondent

order made by:

JUDGE OBRADOVIC

DATE OF ORDER:

24 November 2022

PENDING FURTHER ORDER, THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Order 1.2 made on 18 July 2022 is discharged.

2.The child X born in 2013 (“the child”) shall spend time with the father, Mr Ambrose, as follows:

(a)Commencing on Saturday 3 December 2022 and each alternate Saturday thereafter from 9am to 4pm;

(b)Commencing on Saturday 11 February 2023 and each alternate weekend thereafter from 9am Saturday to 4pm Saturday and from 9am Sunday to 4pm Sunday; and

(c)Commencing on Saturday 1 June 2023 and each alternate weekend thereafter from 9am Saturday to 4pm Sunday.

3.The time in Order 2 is conditional upon the following:

(a)Forthwith, the father do all things and acts and sign all documents necessary to enrol in drug and alcohol counselling and provide confirmation of his enrolment to the mother’s legal representatives and the Independent Children’s Lawyer as soon as reasonably practicable;

(b)The father attend appointments with the drug and alcohol counsellor at a frequency recommended by the said counsellor and for the duration of the treatment recommended by the counsellor;

(c)The father is to provide evidence of his participation in drug and alcohol counselling to the mother’s legal representatives and the Independent Children’s Lawyer within twenty-one (21) days of these Orders.

(d)The father shall obtain a report from his drug and alcohol counsellor upon the Independent Children’s Lawyer’s request addressing the following:

(i)Dates of attendances;

(ii)Education and Therapy undertaken;

(iii)Any programs completed;

(iv)Any courses completed;

(v)Any further programs or courses recommended for the Father to complete; and

(vi)General comments.

(e)The father shall each 3 months contact and make an appointment in Town J with the Drug Detection Agency for the purpose of undertaking a chain of custody 5-panel hair follicle drug test and for the purpose of…

Continue reading Theodore & Ambrose

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Theodore & Ambrose [2022] FedCFamC2F 1619
Case
[2022] FedCFamC2F 1619
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was asked to decide on interim parenting arrangements for a child born in 2013. The primary concern was the father's criminal activities and drug use, which led the mother to suspend the child's unsupervised time with the father. The court was required to determine if the father's conduct posed an unacceptable risk of harm to the child, and if so, what conditions should be imposed to mitigate such risks. The court also needed to weigh the best interests of the child against the father's desire for more unsupervised time.

The court examined the evidence, including the father's criminal history, his admission to drug use, and his recent efforts to change his lifestyle. The court acknowledged the strong relationship between the child and the father but emphasised the importance of safety. It decided that while the child was not currently at an unacceptable risk of harm, certain conditions needed to be imposed to ensure her safety. These conditions included the father's enrolment and participation in drug and alcohol counselling, regular drug testing, and immediate suspension of unsupervised visits if the father faced new criminal charges. The court also ordered a gradual increase in the child's unsupervised time with the father over a six-month period, allowing the father to demonstrate sustained change in his behaviour.

The court's decision balanced the child's need for a relationship with both parents against the need to protect her from potential harm. It recognised the father's efforts to change but stressed the importance of continued supervision and accountability. The final orders reflect these considerations, aiming to provide a safe environment for the child while gradually increasing her time with the father.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.