WING & LOR

[2009] FamCA 1274

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WING & LOR [2009] FamCA 1274

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim proceedings – with whom a child spends time – best interests – child to spend increased time with the mother over the Christmas period

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60CA & 60CC

APPLICANT: Ms Wing

RESPONDENT: Ms Lor

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Ashley Malcolm Kent

FILE NUMBER: ADC 1937 of 2009

DATE DELIVERED: 9 DECEMBER 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: ADELAIDE

PLACE HEARD: ADELAIDE

AMENDED

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT OF:

BURR J

HEARING DATE: 9 DECEMBER 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:	MR RICHARDS
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:	CLELANDS

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:	MS PYKE QC
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:	GORDON  CHENG

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:	MR KENT
SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:	LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSION

Orders

1. During the 2009 / 2010 Christmas school holiday period spanning the period 11 December 2009 to 27 January 2010 paragraph 2 of the Orders made by Federal Magistrate Cole on 25 May 2009 and paragraph 2(c) of the Orders made by the Honourable Justice Strickland on 10 September 2009 be suspended.

2. The mother spend time with the child … born … September 2002 as follows:-

   (a)    from the conclusion of school on the last day of Term 4 (Friday 11 December 2009) until 5.00 pm on Tuesday 15 December 2009;

   (b)    from 5.00 pm on Wednesday 23 December 2009 until 1.00 pm on Friday 25 December 2009;

   (c)    from 10.00 am on Friday 1 January 2010 until 5.00 pm on Wednesday 6 January 2010;

   (d)    from 10.00 am on Friday 15 January 2010 until 5.00 pm on Wednesday 20 January 2010;

   (e)    from 10.00 am on Saturday 13 February 2010 until 12 noon on Sunday 14 February 2010.

3. The mother is restrained and an injunction is hereby granted restraining the mother from undertaking any form of employment or engaging in any business activity at the business premises at which she is employed during the periods of time referred to in paragraph 2 hereof.

4. The mother’s Application in a Case filed on 29 October 2009 and the paternal grandmother’s Response to an Application in a Case filed on 25 November 2009 are otherwise dismissed and removed from the pending list.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT ADELAIDE

FILE NUMBER: ADC 1937  of 2009

MS WING

Applicant mother

And

MS LOR

Respondent paternal grandmother

And

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Amended on 18 DECEMBER 2009

1. I have before me competing applications in respect of the time that the parties are each to spend with the child, born in September 2002.  By Orders made by Strickland J on 10 September 2009, the mother has been having increasing time with the child.

2. I must, even on an interim application, have regard to the provisions of Section 60CA and Section 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 as amended.   I have had regard to those provisions.  I do not intend to recite in any great detail any specific findings in relation to those detailed provisions. 

3. However, I am satisfied that it represents the child’s best interests to spend increased time with the mother over the Christmas period.  As put by the Independent Children’s Lawyer, it does afford an opportunity during the Christmas period for the child to develop a more fulsome relationship with the mother and, in line with the recommendations of Dr B that there be extended time between the mother and the child supported over a period, this I agree affords an ideal opportunity to do so.

4. I accept though the representations of the paternal grandmother’s Counsel that the mother’s Application does not indicate any gradual approach to that increased time. 

5. In my view, there is no great science about the determination of this Application.  Increased time with the mother is supported on the evidence available to the Court.  Undertaking it in too much of an express fashion may not though represent the child’s best interests.

I certify that the preceding five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Burr (amended on 18 December 2009)

Associate: 

Date:  9 December 2009