WICKS & FOOTE (No.4)

[2019] FCCA 872

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WICKS & FOOTE (No.4) [2019] FCCA 872

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Parenting – where final parenting orders were made 2 months before new proceedings commenced – 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 (Cth), ss.12A, 13A, 60B, 60I

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

Poisat & Poisat [2014] FamCAFC 128

Reid & Lynch [2010] FamCAFC 184

Rice & Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725

SPS & PLS (2008) FLC 93-363

Applicant: MS WICKS

Respondent: MR FOOTE

File Number: PAC 3888 of 2017

Judgment of: Judge Obradovic

Hearing date: 21 March 2019

Date of Last Submission: 21 March 2019

Delivered at: Parramatta

Delivered on: 3 May 2019

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Hamilton

Solicitors for the Applicant: Coode & Corry

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Conte-Mills

Solicitors for the Respondent: Higgins Lawyers

ORDERS

1. The Response filed 16 November 2018 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 Wicks & Foote (No.4) is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PARRAMATTA

PAC 3888 of 2017

MS WICKS

Applicant

And

MR FOOTE

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. [X] is 13 years old. Her living arrangements have been the subject of parenting orders since she was but a toddler. The parents, who are respectively the applicant mother and the respondent father to this application, first entered into consent orders regarding [X]’s parenting on 23 November 2006 (“First Final Orders”).

2. Pursuant to the First Final Orders [X] lived with her mother and spent time with her father. By the very fact that [X] was so young when the orders were made, time was gradual and fairly flexible.

3. There were changes to both parents’ lives and importantly to [X]’s life over the course of the next ten years. One significant change was that the mother re-partnered. This occurred in approximately November 2014.

4. In 2017 the father commenced a new round of litigation between the parties. In his affidavit which was filed in support of the orders which he then sought, including orders for [X] to live with him, he outlined what he considered to be a number of changed circumstances. The application was made in circumstances where the father retained [X] contrary to the First Final Orders.

5. On 13 September 2017 orders were made for [X] to be returned to the mother and to spend time with the father.

6. As is the usual course…