WRIGHT & STEWART
[2012] FMCAfam 16
•12 January 2012
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| WRIGHT & STEWART | [2012] FMCAfam 16 |
| FAMILY LAW – Children – parenting orders – application for parenting orders. PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Review of Registrar’s decision – where Registrar declined to grant leave to serve short notice of initiating Application – no reviewable error. |
| Family Law Act 1975 |
| Applicant: | MR WRIGHT |
| Respondent: | MS STEWART |
| File Number: | SYC 114 of 2012 |
| Judgment of: | Scarlett FM |
| Hearing date: | 12 January 2012 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 12 January 2012 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 12 January 2012 |
REPRESENTATION
| Application dealt with in chambers |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Ziman and Ziman Solicitors |
ORDERS
The Application for Review filed on 12 January 2012 is dismissed.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Wright & Stewart is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYC 114 of 2012
| MR WRIGHT |
Applicant
And
| MS STEWART |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Application
The Applicant, the Father of a little girl born [in] 2010, is seeking to review the decision of a Registrar made on 11th January 2012 not to grant leave to serve short notice of his Application for parenting orders filed that same day.
The Application for parenting orders has been given a first return date of 20th March 2012 at 9:30am. The Registrar noted that there was:
no earlier FRD & insufficient evidence re urgency.
The Applicant gives these reasons for review:
The Registrar declined to grant leave to serve short notice of the Initiating Application albeit that this matter involves a 22 month old infant who has been cared for by the father for 3 days per week for 3 consecutive weeks out of 4, & for 1 day of the fourth week. The mother has refused to honour this arrangement since Christmas Day & the father is not having any contact with the child. The child is of such a young age that the secure bond she has with the father could easily be broken. The return date offered by the Registry is 20/03/12…it will have been 3 months since the father saw the child if this date is not brought forward.
Order Sought
The Applicant seeks an order that leave be granted to serve short notice of the application
Conclusions
The Applicant is seeking to review a decision by the Registrar not to allocate a return date earlier than the first return date of 20th March 2012.
The Registrar’s decision is one arising from the Registrar’s administrative function. It is not a judicial decision that has been delegated to the Registrar.
There is no evidence that the Registrar did not consider the available evidence before deciding that there was insufficient evidence of urgency to warrant the allocation of an early return date and the consequent leave to serve short notice. It was entirely open to the Registrar to do so. There is no evidence of any reviewable error.
The exercise of an administrative function by a Registrar is not subject to judicial review.
The Application for Review will be dismissed.
I certify that the preceding nine (9) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Scarlett FM
Date: 13 January 2012
0
0
1