Wooley and Wooley
Case
•
[2018] FamCA 756
•11 September 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Wooley and Wooley [2018] FamCA 756
[2018] FamCA 756
11 September 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Wooley and Wooley, Cronin J considered orders concerning a child, B, born in 2007. The proceedings involved the parents of the child and sought to determine the living arrangements and parental responsibilities for B.
The court was required to determine the primary caregiver for the child, the allocation of parental responsibility, and the nature and extent of communication and contact between the child and the non-resident parent. Additionally, the court considered how major decisions regarding the child's health, education, and religion would be managed and how information would be shared between the parents. The court also addressed the discharge of prior parental orders and the role of the Independent Children's Lawyer.
Cronin J ordered that all prior parental orders be discharged. The child, B, was to live with the mother, who was granted sole parental responsibility. The father was permitted to communicate with the child by telephone on Thursdays at 6:00 pm, initiated by the father, with the mother to ensure the child's availability, privacy, and willingness to speak. The father was also to send the child gifts and cards for her birthday, Easter, and Christmas, and communicate as otherwise agreed in writing. The mother was to keep the father informed of major decisions concerning B's health, education, and religion via the My-Mob app. Both parents were ordered to exchange residential addresses and contact telephone numbers. The father was permitted to receive printed school information regarding B's progress at his own cost. All extant proceedings were dismissed, and the Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged. The orders included particulars of obligations, consequences of contravention, and assistance for compliance, as set out in an attached Fact Sheet.
The court was required to determine the primary caregiver for the child, the allocation of parental responsibility, and the nature and extent of communication and contact between the child and the non-resident parent. Additionally, the court considered how major decisions regarding the child's health, education, and religion would be managed and how information would be shared between the parents. The court also addressed the discharge of prior parental orders and the role of the Independent Children's Lawyer.
Cronin J ordered that all prior parental orders be discharged. The child, B, was to live with the mother, who was granted sole parental responsibility. The father was permitted to communicate with the child by telephone on Thursdays at 6:00 pm, initiated by the father, with the mother to ensure the child's availability, privacy, and willingness to speak. The father was also to send the child gifts and cards for her birthday, Easter, and Christmas, and communicate as otherwise agreed in writing. The mother was to keep the father informed of major decisions concerning B's health, education, and religion via the My-Mob app. Both parents were ordered to exchange residential addresses and contact telephone numbers. The father was permitted to receive printed school information regarding B's progress at his own cost. All extant proceedings were dismissed, and the Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged. The orders included particulars of obligations, consequences of contravention, and assistance for compliance, as set out in an attached Fact Sheet.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Wooley and Wooley [2018] FamCA 756
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1