FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Vaughan & Vaughan (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 129
File number(s): ADC 5154 of 2022 Judgment of: KARI J Date of judgment: 28 February 2025 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interlocutory proceedings – Where there are five children – Where three of the children have high needs – Where there are orders for time spending between the children and the father to take place at a Children’s Contact Service – Where the father seeks to vary the time spending arrangements for the children and seeks equal time with four of the children – Where the father has not complied with orders for time spending – Where each parent has concerns for the other parent’s parenting capacity – Where the father was self-represented and during his submissions made admissions of instances of family violence – Where it does not appear that there has been a change that would warrant the Court revisiting the previously ordered parenting arrangements – Orders made for the father to spend time with the children at the Children’s Contact Service
FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the Court’s decision in relation to the mother’s interlocutory financial application is reserved – Where the mother seeks to reopen the financial aspect of the interlocutory proceedings – Where reasons continue to be reserved pending the outcome of the application to reopen
Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60B, 60CA, 60CC, 64B
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) rr 1.33, 1.34, 2.18, 5.08, 7.18, 7.23, 10.26, 10.27, 12.06, Ch 7, Div 7.1.5
Cases cited: Deiter & Deiter [2011] FamCAFC 82
Eccheli & Eccheli [2024] FedCFamC1F 234
Fiedler & Vitale [2025] FedCFamC1A 7
Goode & Goode (2006) FLC 93-286
Hall & Hall (1979) FLC 90-713
Vaughan & Vaughan (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 371 Vaughan & Vaughan (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC2F 371
Vaughan & Vaughan [2023] FedCFamC2F 1682
Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 120 Date of hearing: 28 November 2024 Place: Adelaide Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Tredrea Solicitor for the Applicant: Camatta Lempens Pty Ltd The Respondent: Litigant in person Counsel for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Mr Hemsley Solicitor for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Legal Services Commission of South Australia ORDERS
ADC 5154 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MS VAUGHAN
Applicant
AND: MR VAUGHAN
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
KARI J
DATE OF ORDER:
28 FEBRUARY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
Parenting
1.That until further order:
(a)The father shall spend supervised time with the children W born 2008, X born 2010, Y born 2012 and Z born 2012 (collectively referred to as “the children”) at the FF Children’s Contact Service, Suburb R (“Suburb R CCS”) in their “on‑site unsupervised scheme” on the following basis:
(i)Time spending shall take place at dates and times as can be accommodated by the service, provided however that such time occur each alternate weekend and that it not exceed…
Continue reading Vaughan & Vaughan (No 2)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Vaughan & Vaughan (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 129
- Case
- [2025] FedCFamC1F 129
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court found that there had not been a change in circumstances that would warrant revisiting the previously ordered parenting arrangements. Given the father's non-compliance and the admissions of family violence, the court maintained the existing orders for supervised time-spending at a Children’s Contact Service. The court also restrained the father from discussing the proceedings with the children and from recording any appointments with experts. The court ordered the preparation of a family report by a Court Child Expert or Family Consultant to address the children's views, the impact of various orders on the children and their relationships with both parents, and any other matters considered important for the children's welfare. The court dismissed the father's application for equal time with four of the children and referred the matter to the pool of matters awaiting trial. The mother's application to reopen the interlocutory financial proceedings was listed for an interim hearing.
The court ordered that the father spend supervised time with the children at the designated service, with specific conditions regarding the frequency and duration of the visits. The father was further restrained from discussing the proceedings with the children and from recording any expert appointments. The parties were enjoined from discussing the proceedings with the children or permitting others to do so. The Independent Children’s Lawyer was granted liberty to relist the parenting proceedings if the contact service ceased to facilitate the visits. The court also ordered the preparation of a family report by a designated expert, with specific instructions regarding the content and dissemination of the report. The court ordered the parties to provide their contact details and attend interviews with the expert as directed. The mother’s application to reopen the financial aspect of the interlocutory proceedings was listed for an interim hearing.
Orders
Orders of the court
ADC 5154 of 2022
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:
MS VAUGHAN
Applicant
AND:
MR VAUGHAN
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
KARI J
DATE OF ORDER:
28 FEBRUARY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
Parenting
1. That until further order:
(a) The father shall spend supervised time with the children W born 2008, X born 2010, Y born 2012 and Z born 2012 (collectively referred to as “the children”) at the FF Children’s Contact Service, Suburb R (“Suburb R CCS”) in their “on‑site unsupervised scheme” on the following basis:
(i) Time spending shall take place at dates and times as can be accommodated by the service, provided however that such time occur each alternate weekend and that it not exceed a period of two hours on each occasion;
(ii) The parties shall both comply with the prescribed terms of the service;
(iii) The children are not to leave the premises of the service; and
(iv) The father is restrained by injunction from discussing these proceedings, or any issue arising in the proceedings with the children at any such time spending.
2. The father is restrained by injunction from recording or transcribing in any way any appointments he attends with any expert instructed in the parenting proceedings (including but not limited to any Psychiatrist, Court Child Expert or independent Report Writer), and/or from permitting or facilitating any other person doing so on his behalf.
3. The parties are each restrained by injunction from discussing these proceedings or any issue arising in these proceedings with the children or from permitting any other person to do so.
4. Liberty is granted to the Independent Children’s Lawyer (“ICL”) to have the parenting proceedings relisted in the event that the ICL is informed that the Suburb R CCS is no longer willing to facilitate the father’s time spending with the children.
5. Pursuant to s 62G(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the parties and the children V born 2008, W born 2008, X born 2010, Z born 2012 and X born 2012 are to attend upon a Court Child Expert (practicing under their appointment as a family consultant), or a Family Consultant appointed under Regulation 7, nominated by the Court Children’s Service (referred to as the Family Consultant) NOTING THAT the Court shall appoint a Court Child Expert/Family Consultant who is a clinical psychologist, for the purposes of the preparation of a family report, such report to be released at the first available date and that the family report address:
(a) any views expressed by the children;
(b) the matters set out in ss 60CC, 61D(3) and 61DAA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth);
(c) the impact upon the children and upon the children’s relationship with the mother if the Court made orders as sought by the father;
(d) the impact upon the children and upon the children’s relationship with the father if the Court made orders as sought by the mother;
(e) any other matters that the Court Child Expert/Family Consultant considers important to the welfare or best interests of the children.
6. Not later than 4.00 pm on 7 March 2025 the parties must provide their contact telephone numbers and email addresses to …@....
7. Each party will do all things necessary to ensure they each and with the children referred to in Order 5 attend upon the Family Consultant pursuant to Section 62G(3A), unless otherwise determined by the Court Child Expert that Section 62G(3B) applies.
8. The parties and the children referred to in Order 5 shall attend for interviews at such times, dates and places, and by such means as the Court Child Expert/Family Consultant may advise.
9. The Court Child Expert/Family Consultant shall be at liberty to inspect any material filed by the parties, together with orders made and reasons for judgment delivered in these proceedings, including but not limited to the reasons of Judge Kirton delivered 21 December 2023, the reasons of Judge Dickson delivered 27 March 2024 and these reasons delivered 28 February 2025.
10. Upon the family report being provided to the Court, the Court will release the report and provide a copy to each party (or if represented, the party’s lawyer) and to any Independent Children’s Lawyer in the proceedings.
11. Unless a party objects in writing within 14 days of the date of releasing the family report, a copy of the family report may further be provided to the following, if the Court is requested to do so for a purpose related to the care, welfare or development of the children:
(a) a Children’s Court;
(b) a child protection authority;
(c) a State or Territory legal aid authority; and
(d) a convener of any legal dispute resolution conference.
12. Unless otherwise ordered, no person shall release the family report, or provide access to the family report to any other person.
13. The parties’ competing interlocutory parenting applications do otherwise stand dismissed.
Procedural
14. The proceedings be referred to the pool of matters awaiting trial.
15. The Application in a Proceeding filed by the mother on 28 February 2025, to reopen the interlocutory financial proceedings, be listed for interim hearing (1 hour allowed) on 23 April 2025 at 10:00 am.
16. The mother forthwith effect service on the father of the Application in a Proceeding filed 28 February 2025 together with the affidavit in support.
17. No later than 4:00 pm on 28 March 2025 the father do file and serve a Response to the said Application in a Proceeding together with one affidavit in support of the same.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
Background
Background to the litigation
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.