Tsocas and Rilak

[2018] FamCA 981

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TSOCAS & RILAK [2018] FamCA 981

FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURE – subpoena to child’s treating practitioner – objection to subpoena on the basis that it would threaten therapeutic relationship – consideration of Division 12A – consideration of importance of determining best interests based on relevant evidence – where access to subpoena material granted on limited basis.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) - s 69ZN

Baker v Campbell (1983) 153 CLR 52

Crawford & Sisinis and Anor [2014] FamCA 912

Riemann & Riemann [2017] FamCA 318

APPLICANT: Mr Tsocas

RESPONDENT: Ms Rilak

FILE NUMBER: SYC 2062 of 2010

DATE DELIVERED: 23 November 2018

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Gill J

HEARING DATE: 25 October 2018

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Self-representing

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Self-representing

Orders

1. The parties are granted leave to inspect the material produced on subpoena by Ms RR (‘the subpoena material’);

2. The parties may not photocopy the subpoena material without the prior leave of the Court;

3. The parties may not communicate the content of the subpoena material to any person, excepting the following:

   (a)       A treating therapist of either of the parties;

   (b)       A Court-appointed Family Consultant or Single Expert;

   (c)       A legal practitioner representing either of the parties. 

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Tsocas & Rilak has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: SYC 2062  of 2010

Mr Tsocas

Applicant

And

Ms Rilak

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Background

1. This matter concerns a subpoena to produce directed to Ms RR, the psychologist who is currently seeing the child of the relationship, B (the child), and the father.  The subpoena has been issued at the request of the mother.  Ms RR has lodged a notice of objection to the subpoena.

2. Ms RR’s involvement in the proceedings comes from the final orders that were made on 13 November 2015.  Those orders required the parents to make appointments to attend upon Ms RR, to provide her with a copy of the orders of the court and the reasons for judgement along with the report of Dr C.  Further, the parents were to attend such appointments as made by Ms RR and follow all recommendations made by her, “including but not limited to referrals to other treating professionals for either or both of the parents and for the child.”

3. The child and the father have been attending on Ms RR.  Ms RR states that the mother has seen her once…