EASTON & EASTON (No.3)

[2015] FCCA 1837

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

EASTON & EASTON (No.3) [2015] FCCA 1837

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Children – parenting orders – interim orders – application to vary orders – where application set down for interim hearing – where there have been contravention proceedings.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Interim hearing – directions for interim hearing.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.60B, 60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAA

Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), s.51

Cases cited:
Easton & Easton [2015] FCCA 1269
Easton & Easton [2015] FCCA 1834

Applicant: MS EASTON

Respondent: MR EASTON

File Number: SYC 6515 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Scarlett

Hearing date: 1 July 2015

Date of Last Submission: 1 July 2015

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 1 July 2015

REPRESENTATION

Solicitor for the Applicant: Ms Kaiti

Solicitors for the Applicant: CBD legal

Solicitor for the Respondent: Mr Khedr

Solicitors for the Respondent: Cambridge Legal

Independent Children's Lawyer: Ms Quirk

Solicitors for the Independent Children's Lawyer: Crawford Ryan Lawyers Pty Limited

ORDERS

UNTIL FURTHER ORDER

1. Order 2 of the Orders made by consent on 3 February 2014 shall be varied as follows:

   (a)until 4 September 2015, each Sunday from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm

   (b)from 4 September:

   (i)for the first 3 weekends out 4 from 3:00 pm Saturday to 7:30 pm Sunday;

   (ii)for the last weekend out of 4, from 4:00 pm Friday to 9:00 am Saturday.

2. Order 4 is to be varied as follows:

   (a)“That for the purpose of facilitating the contact change-overs the father or his nominee shall collect the children from the mother or her nominee at McDonalds (omitted), (omitted) at the commencement and conclusion of each of the periods set out in Order 4 herein.”

3. Neither parent is to use any form of corporal punishment or physical chastisement on any of the children.

4. The Application filed on 20 October 2014 is set down for interim hearing at 10:00 am on Monday 17 August 2015.

5. As provided by section 51 of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999, each party may rely on one affidavit per witness, not to exceed ten (1) pages of text excluding annexures.

6. Any affidavit to be relied on in the proceedings must be filed and served no later than 10 August 2015.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Easton & Easton (No.3) is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 6515 of 2013

MS EASTON

Applicant

And

MR EASTON

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application in a Case

1. This is an Application in a Case by the mother of the parties’ three children, X aged 5 years, Y aged 4 years and Z aged 3 years, seeking to very interim parenting orders made by consent on 3 February 2014. She seeks that the father’s time with the children should be at a Contact Centre, that the father should attend an accredited parenting course and that she should have sole parental responsibility for the children.  

2. The mother claims that the Orders should be varied because of family violence by the father.

Contravention proceedings

1. The father brought a Contravention Application against the mother. On 15 May 2015 the Court dismissed one of the counts, found that the mother had established a reasonable excuse in respect of two others and found that the mother had contravened the Orders on two occasions without reasonable excuse (Easton & Easton[1]).

   [1] [2015] FCCA 1269

2. Consequential Orders were made today, requiring both parents to attend a post-separation parenting course as directed by the Independent Children’s Lawyer and making an order for costs against the mother (Easton & Easton[2]).  

   [2] [2015] FCCA 1834

Interim Hearing

1. The Application has been set down for an interim hearing on Monday 17 August 2015. As the children have not seen their father for some time, the Independent Children’s Lawyer has proposed some interim orders to assist the children to rebuild their attachment to their father. The father agrees with these proposed orders but the mother does not.

2. The proposal from the Independent Children’s Lawyer is intended to cover the situation until the Interim Hearing can take place. The proposed orders appear to be sensible and in the children’s best interests and I have decided to make those Orders until further Order.

3. Obviously, the Orders will be revisited at the Interim Hearing, which is to take place on Monday 17 August. 

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Scarlett

Associate: 

Date:  3 July 2015