WENN & WENN
Case
•
[2020] FamCA 86
•13 February 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
WENN & WENN [2020] FamCA 86
[2020] FamCA 86
13 February 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of *WENN & WENN*, Stevenson J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the mother for international relocation of the child to Canada, and for the child to have no contact with the father. The mother was the primary carer, and there was no communication between the parents. The father had engaged in family violence.
The court was required to determine whether it was in the child's best interests to permit the mother to relocate to Canada, and whether the child should have no time or communication with the father. The court also considered the father's past engagement in family violence and the mother's negative and anxious disposition towards any relationship between the child and the father, noting the father had had no opportunity to repair his relationship with the child.
Stevenson J reasoned that given the father's history of family violence and the lack of opportunity for him to re-establish a relationship with the child, it was no longer in the child's best interests for such a relationship to be re-established. The mother's anxiety about the prospect of a relationship between the child and the father was also a significant factor. The court applied the paramount consideration of the child's best interests under the *Family Law Act 1975*.
The court ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility for long-term decisions concerning the child, and the child was to live with the mother. The mother was permitted to relocate with the child to Canada, and was given sole responsibility for the child's Australian and Canadian passports, with the father's signature being dispensed with. The child was ordered to have no contact or communication with the father until the age of 18, with limited exceptions for annual letters from the father, subject to the discretion of a therapist appointed to assist the mother and child with the implementation of the orders. The father was restrained from attempting to contact or spend time with the child outside of these limited provisions.
The court was required to determine whether it was in the child's best interests to permit the mother to relocate to Canada, and whether the child should have no time or communication with the father. The court also considered the father's past engagement in family violence and the mother's negative and anxious disposition towards any relationship between the child and the father, noting the father had had no opportunity to repair his relationship with the child.
Stevenson J reasoned that given the father's history of family violence and the lack of opportunity for him to re-establish a relationship with the child, it was no longer in the child's best interests for such a relationship to be re-established. The mother's anxiety about the prospect of a relationship between the child and the father was also a significant factor. The court applied the paramount consideration of the child's best interests under the *Family Law Act 1975*.
The court ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility for long-term decisions concerning the child, and the child was to live with the mother. The mother was permitted to relocate with the child to Canada, and was given sole responsibility for the child's Australian and Canadian passports, with the father's signature being dispensed with. The child was ordered to have no contact or communication with the father until the age of 18, with limited exceptions for annual letters from the father, subject to the discretion of a therapist appointed to assist the mother and child with the implementation of the orders. The father was restrained from attempting to contact or spend time with the child outside of these limited provisions.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Negligence & Tort
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Remedies
-
Injunction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
WENN & WENN [2020] FamCA 86
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
1
Dennison & Wang
[2010] FamCAFC 182
Sayer v Radcliffe
[2012] FamCAFC 209
U v U
[2002] HCA 36