Tindall and Saldo (No 2)
Case
•
[2010] FamCA 1174
•10 December 2010
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Tindall and Saldo (No 2) [2010] FamCA 1174
[2010] FamCA 1174
10 December 2010
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Tindall and Saldo (No 2)*, Justice Austin of the Family Court of Australia considered applications by both the respondent mother and the father concerning parenting orders for their child. The mother's application filed on 2 September 2010 was dismissed, while the father's response filed on 3 December 2010 led to specific orders regarding his time with the child.
The court was required to determine the terms of supervised contact between the father and the child, including the arrangements for contact, the responsibilities of each parent in facilitating this contact, and the communication protocols. Additionally, the court needed to address the costs associated with an interim hearing and the instructions to be given to a single expert witness for an updated report.
Justice Austin reasoned that supervised contact was necessary, ordering that the father spend time with the child each alternate weekend for a minimum of two hours, under the supervision of a designated contact service. Both parents were directed to cooperate with the contact service's assessment and comply with its rules and directions. Specific provisions were made for the handover of the child and for the father's attendance at the contact centre. The father was also granted telephone communication with the child weekly. The court further ordered that the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer's costs from the interim hearing be reserved for the final trial. Crucially, the parties and the Independent Children’s Lawyer were instructed to engage a single expert to prepare an updated report addressing the child's risk of harm from the father, the parents' capacities, their attitudes towards parenting, and the impact of the father's past offences on the mother's parenting. The cost of this expert report was to be in accordance with the Legal Aid Commission of New South Wales' scale for psychiatrists in children's representative matters, with the Independent Children’s Lawyer initially responsible for these costs, subject to final trial orders.
The court was required to determine the terms of supervised contact between the father and the child, including the arrangements for contact, the responsibilities of each parent in facilitating this contact, and the communication protocols. Additionally, the court needed to address the costs associated with an interim hearing and the instructions to be given to a single expert witness for an updated report.
Justice Austin reasoned that supervised contact was necessary, ordering that the father spend time with the child each alternate weekend for a minimum of two hours, under the supervision of a designated contact service. Both parents were directed to cooperate with the contact service's assessment and comply with its rules and directions. Specific provisions were made for the handover of the child and for the father's attendance at the contact centre. The father was also granted telephone communication with the child weekly. The court further ordered that the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer's costs from the interim hearing be reserved for the final trial. Crucially, the parties and the Independent Children’s Lawyer were instructed to engage a single expert to prepare an updated report addressing the child's risk of harm from the father, the parents' capacities, their attitudes towards parenting, and the impact of the father's past offences on the mother's parenting. The cost of this expert report was to be in accordance with the Legal Aid Commission of New South Wales' scale for psychiatrists in children's representative matters, with the Independent Children’s Lawyer initially responsible for these costs, subject to final trial orders.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Expert Evidence
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Saldo & Tindall [2012] FamCA 194
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1