Verney and Bolger

[2018] FCCA 920

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VERNEY & BOLGER [2018] FCCA 920

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Parenting – where final parenting orders were made by consent on 24 January 2014 – consideration as to whether there were changed circumstances to justify a new hearing – principles in Rice & Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725 discussed – preliminary issue – where best interests of the child is primary consideration – whether change in circumstances is of sufficient significance to justify revisiting the parenting arrangements – application dismissed.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975, s.61DA

Evidence Act 1995, s.144

Cases cited:

CDJ v VAJ (1998) 197 CLR 172
CDW v LVE [2015] WASCA 247
F & C & Child Representative [2004] FamCA 568
King & Finneran (2001) FLC 93-079
Marsden v Winch [2009] FamCAFC 152
McGregor & McGregor [2012] FamCAFC 69
Reid & Lynch [2010] FamCAFC 184

Rice & Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725

SPS & PLS (2008) FLC 93-363

Applicant: MS VERNEY

Respondent: MR BOLGER

File Number: PAC 4268 of 2011

Judgment of: Judge Obradovic

Hearing date: 26 July 2017

Date of Last Submission: 18 August 2017

Delivered at: Parramatta

Delivered on: 18 April 2018

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Cantrall

Solicitors for the Applicant: Coleman Greig Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Rosic

Solicitors for the Respondent: Kells The Lawyers

ORDERS

1. The Initiating Application filed 20 February 2017 is dismissed.

2. Remove all outstanding issues from the list of cases awaiting finalisation.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PARRAMATTA

PAC 4268 of 2011

MS VERNEY

Applicant

And

MR BOLGER

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. On 24 January 2014, with consent of the parties, the Court made final parenting orders with respect to the parties’ two children:

   a)[X] born on (omitted) 2007; and

   b)[Y] born on (omitted) 2008.

   (“Final Orders”)

2. Pursuant to the Final Orders, the parents have equal shared parental responsibility and the children live week about with each of their parents during the school term and the holidays are shared. At the time of the Final Orders [X] was not yet 7 years old and [Y] had just turned 5.[1]

   [1] It was submitted on behalf of the father that the children have been living in an equal time regime since September 2011, when they were 4 and 2 respectively. At the time of this hearing, this had been for a period of approximately 6 years.

3. The Final Orders also provide, inter alia, for a consultation mechanism in respect of major long-term issues concerning the children and for information sharing in respect of the children’s medical issues, social, school or religious functions and “any other matter relevant to the welfare of the children.”

4. By way of her Initiating Application filed 20 February 2017 the mother seeks an order for sole parental responsibility for the children and that the children’s time with the father be reduced…