Younge and Hallman

Case

[2017] FamCA 492

14 July 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Younge and Hallman [2017] FamCA 492 [2017] FamCA 492 14 July 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned parenting orders made by Stevenson J in relation to the child B. The dispute involved the father and mother of the child, and the court was required to determine the arrangements for the child's living arrangements, time spent with each parent, and specific issues relating to the child's health and education.

The court was tasked with determining the appropriate orders for equal shared parental responsibility, the child's primary residence, and the specific schedule for the child's time with the father, including during school holidays and special occasions. Additionally, the court had to address conditions surrounding the child's time with the father, communication protocols between the parents, and the management of the child's medical and psychological treatment, including consultations with practitioners and the sharing of information.

Stevenson J discharged all existing parenting orders and made new orders establishing equal shared parental responsibility. The child was ordered to live with the mother, with a detailed schedule for the child's time with the father. The court also imposed conditions on the father's time with the child, requiring the presence of his partner or paternal grandmother for a period of twelve months, subject to extension based on medical advice and parental agreement. The orders further stipulated detailed arrangements for communication between the parents, the child's medical and psychological treatment, and engagement with the child's school and other professionals, emphasising the need for ongoing consultation and information sharing between the parents regarding these matters.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

Legal Concepts

  • Procedural Fairness

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

4

Statutory Material Cited

1

MRR v GR [2010] HCA 4
M v M [1988] HCA 68
Briginshaw v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34