FAMILY LAW – application for review – review of Senior Judicial Registrar’s decision – interim parenting orders allowing for unsupervised time with the father – father’s admitted history of alcohol abuse and some family violence and breaches of domestic violence orders – alleged unacceptable risk requiring ongoing supervised time only pending final hearing – no unacceptable risk found – application for review largely dismissed – additional interim order providing that father’s time suspended until satisfactory CDT result

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – modest asset pool – where Husband asserts post-separation decline in earning capacity – where Wife makes superior post-separation contributions – where Wife has sole care of young children with no child support of significance – where Husband’s actions have reduced value of assets available for distributions – adjustment in favour of Wife 

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – unacceptable risk – where Father has pleaded guilty to sexual offences against Mother when she was a minor – where Father is registered sex offender - where Court finds Father has additionally subjected Mother to serious family violence – where Father holds unremittingly negative attitude towards Mother and accepts no responsibility for his own conduct – where Father is lacking in insight – orders made for no time or communication with Father 

FAMILY LAW – final parenting orders – equal shared parental responsibility – dispute over time with father – where both parties seek to relocate – mother seeking week about arrangement – father seeking two out of three weekends – father rely upon family report recommendations – where parties agreed upon children’s education prior hearing – where parties agreed on children’s extracurricular activities prior to hearing 

FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – contraventions of order providing for children to communicate with Father – whether no case to answer – eight contraventions proven without reasonable excuse 

FAMILY LAW– final property orders – oral reasons delivered soon after last day of hearing – settled reasons – third parties – 7 day final hearing – More than 400 items of personal property valued – very detailed evidence from Husband and Wife as to personal property – 2125 page court book – ownership and value of more than 149 items of personal property in dispute – allegation of gift of personal property by delivery – whether Husband or Wife had dismantled or removed personal property prior to valuation – fraud/theft allegations not proven – third party and other peoples claim of ownership accepted – whether Husband or Wife should retain FMH – long marriage – disparity of initial contribution – Husband brought in land unencumbered and machinery – Husband’s ill health significant aspect of Wife’s homemaker contribution – one child with special needs significant aspect of Wife’s parenting contribution – where each party sought sec 75(2) adjustment in his/her favour – NDIS entitlement – substantial part of NDIS not received but applied to administration – carer’s pension – continuing poor health of Husband – Wife with care of teenage child – finding of equal contribution – finding no section 75(2) adjustment – which party to obtain FMH – who should retain items of personal property – order for items to be delivered to adult child. 

FAMILY LAW – emergency hearing – return of matter following ex parte hearing on Saturday night, facilitated by afterhours service – competing allegations of 15 year old child at risk of harm – matter adjourned for 3 days for parties to get legal advice – balancing competing risk of harm to child.   

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – two children, aged 12 and 9 – where the parties agree on final consent orders – where the ICL opposes the orders – where the Court considers it inappropriate to make the consent orders – where the parties enter into their own Parenting Plan – where the Court dismisses all extant applications – where the ICL seeks costs – costs application adjourned.  

FAMILY LAW – final parenting orders – protracted proceedings – parents agree on most aspects in respect of care – past alcohol problem – dispute as to ongoing alcohol consumption while caring for the child – balance of risk and consequences – dispute as to passport – final orders determined by consent and on papers and submission

FAMILY LAW – interim order – directions hearing – looming final hearing – evidence not filed –  where the respondent seeks leave to extend dates for filing to rely upon further documents for trial – dispute as to relevance of information – sought by disclosure and subpoena – disclosure ordered – leave granted for further subpoenas to be filed – extension of filing dates for final hearing  

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Ex-Tempore Reasons for Judgment - Application for Review filed by the Independent Children’s Lawyer – Where orders made by a Senior Judicial Registrar were beyond the scope of the powers conferred in section 67ZC of the Act – where it is unclear what head of power is relied upon to ground such orders being made – Where the father seeks to reagitate such interim orders by way of a further Application in a Proceeding – Where no material change in circumstances is demonstrated by the father – Interim orders the subject of the Review Application discharged – Review Application otherwise dismissed – Application in a Proceeding filed by the father dismissed.  

FAMILY LAW - costs application – where the wife seeks party/party costs to be paid – where each party filed written submissions as to the issue of costs – certify for counsel and senior counsel pursuant to rule 12.28 – costs based on Schedule 3 of the rules – because work based rather than court event based costs in this case – interim property application partly successful – application for disclosure was necessary – costs orders made

FAMILY LAW – REVIEW of Interim Parenting Orders – the Applicant is not spending time with a non-biological child aged 2 years by virtue of Senior Judicial Registrar’s Order – the Applicant regards himself as the child’s ‘dad’ – where the Applicant and the child have a loving relationship – where the biological father has no interest in having a relationship with the child – where the Mother alleges she was subject to Family Violence – where the Family Consultant recommends supervised time – whether the child will be at an unacceptable risk of psychological or physical harm if she spends supervised time with the Applicant – where there is a danger that the child’s relationship with the Applicant will be lost if no time occurs prior to trial – whether the time, if ordered, should be professionally supervised.

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the mother would not facilitate a meaningful relationship with the father – Change of residence ordered – One-month moratorium of no time with the mother.  FAMILY LAW – COSTS – The mother to pay the costs of the Independent Children’s Lawyer.

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – one child, aged 6 – where the parents were in a drug-fuelled and violent relationship – where the father has not spent any time with the child since late 2020 – where the maternal grandparents have provided a great deal of care and support to the child – where the father seeks supervised time graduating to substantial and significant time – where the mother seeks that the father has no time and no communication with the child and that the child lives with her – where the maternal grandparents seek that the child live with the mother unless the Court considers she would pose an unacceptable risk of harm, in which case they would then seek the child live with them – where the Court considers that the child should live with the mother and share parental responsibility with the maternal grandparents – where the Court considers that the father should spend no time and no communication with the child – best interests of the child.

FAMILY LAW – application for review – parenting only interim orders – should the children continue to spend time with the father supervised – should the children spend time with the father in accordance with final orders made 3 April 2023 – where the parties are unable to communicate effectively – where there is significant parental conflict - the children at risk of emotional and psychological harm letter to the children from judicial officer – Independent Children’s Lawyer to give letter to children

FAMILY LAW – practice and procedure – application to adjourn hearing for review of a Senior Judicial Registrar’s decision with respect to urgent interim parenting orders

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – the Mother has a long history, starting in high school, of significant drug use which she says arises in times of “stress” – the Mother has stopped her own supervised time with her young daughter at a supervised contact centre – the young child, aged approximately 5 years, has lived primarily with the Father for the last three years – yet the Mother ran a case seeking that the child should change residence from the Father and live primarily with her – the longest period the Mother has been drug free has been 18 months – for all of this, the Mother still holds down a good job in the public service and has been candid with her employer and managers that she uses illicit drugs on a semi-regular basis – Mother also has a history of not completing drug rehabilitation – best interests considerations – child to continue to live with the Father, Mother to undergo regime of hair-follicle testing before re-commencement of supervised time.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the subject child is 7 years of age – Where the child has spent supervised time with the father for a period of two years – Where both parties have unilaterally taken the child overseas post separation - Where there are significant allegations of family violence perpetrated against the mother and the child by the father –Where the mother seeks orders that the child spend no time with the father - Where the father alleges that the mother’s partner has sexually abused the child – Where despite the father’s allegations of sexual abuse perpetrated by the mother’s new partner he seeks that the child live with the parties on an equal shared care arrangement – Where the Father alleges the mother has fabricated allegations to alienate the child from him - Where the father relies on the mother allowing unsupervised time between him and the child post separation as the basis of the orders sought by him – Findings made that the father perpetrated family violence including coercive and controlling behaviours upon the mother and the child – Finding made that the father cannot positively support a relationship between the child and the mother – Finding that the parties’ parenting relationship is reflective of a dynamic arising from the father’s controlling family violence - Finding that the family violence perpetrated by the father is a contradiction to an order for equal shared parental responsibility - Finding that the culmination of risks posed by the father cannot be sufficiently ameliorated by supervision or otherwise – Orders made that the child spend no time with the father.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Interim proceedings –  Children aged 12 and seven years – Where one child remains in the father’s care and the other remains in the mother’s care – Previous shared care arrangements – High conflict – Allegations of coercive and controlling family violence – Weight to attach to children’s wishes – Orders made pending Family Assessment Report. 

FAMILY LAW – where the mother of the child has recently died – where the step father wants to take the child to Country B for funeral rituals – where the biological father seeks a watchlist order and restraint on the child from being removed from Australia – Country B not Hague convention country – where biological father alleges deceased mothers family prevented him from having relationship with the child – where family violence alleged during the relationship between the mother and biological father –  where biological father has not seen six year old child for three years – where the biological father believes the step father will leave the child in Country B with maternal grandparents – watchlist order denied – where the maternal grandfather also made an undertaking in court  that he ensured the child returns to Australia – where the stepfather has substantial ties to Melbourne – all other extant applications adjourned

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where an application is brought by the stepfather of the subject child who is 11 years of age – Where the biological mother of the child passed away in 2023 in Country C - Where the child has resided in Australia, Country B and Country C –– Where the respondent father asserts the stepfather’s behaviour toward the child presents a cumulative risk that the stepfather is engaging in grooming style behaviour - Where the child has been living with the respondent father in Australia since the death of the biological mother in 2023 – Where the stepfather has spent supervised time with the child in Australia and now seeks orders that he spend time with the child for half of each school holiday period internationally or in Australia and for one weekend each month in Australia – where the child has expressed strong views about spending time with the stepfather – Orders made for the child to spend supervised time with the stepfather on an interim basis.

FAMILY LAW – Interim spousal maintenance – where wife on parental leave following birth of child with new partner – where wife previously worked – whether husband should be required to pay spousal maintenance where the wife is not working because of decisions she made – HELD other adequate reasons exist for why the wife is unable to adequately support herself.  FAMILY LAW – Interim spousal maintenance – where the wife will shortly receive paid parental leave payments under the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010 (Cth) (‘PPL payments’) – whether PPL payments are an ‘income tested pension, allowance or benefit’ for the purposes of section 75(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – HELD payments under the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010 (Cth) are not income tested pensions, allowances or benefits and must be taken into account.  FAMILY LAW – Interim spousal maintenance – relevance of child support payment and children’s expenses to an application for spousal maintenance – where such payments and expenses are excluded from assessment.   FAMILY LAW – Interim spousal maintenance – where wife’s new partner is making contributions for the benefit of their child – where such payments are voluntary and irregular – where no submission put that wife and new partner are in de facto relationship – whether such payments are likely to continue – what quantum of these payments is being used for the expenses of the child of the wife and the new partner.  FAMILY LAW – Interim spousal maintenance – where there are three distinct periods covering the application including when the wife is on unpaid parental leave, when she is in receipt of PPL payments and what happens when the PPL payments end – different maintenance orders considered in relation to each period.

FAMILY LAW - costs application – where the wife seeks party/party costs to be paid – where each party filed written submissions as to the issue of costs – certify for counsel and senior counsel pursuant to rule 12.28 – costs based on Schedule 3 of the rules – because work based rather than court event based costs in this case – interim property application partly successful – application for disclosure was necessary – costs orders made 

FAMILY LAW – REVIEW of Interim Parenting Orders – the Applicant is not spending time with a non-biological child aged 2 years by virtue of Senior Judicial Registrar’s Order – the Applicant regards himself as the child’s ‘dad’ – where the Applicant and the child have a loving relationship – where the biological father has no interest in having a relationship with the child – where the Mother alleges she was subject to Family Violence – where the Family Consultant recommends supervised time – whether the child will be at an unacceptable risk of psychological or physical harm if she spends supervised time with the Applicant – where there is a danger that the child’s relationship with the Applicant will be lost if no time occurs prior to trial – whether the time, if ordered, should be professionally supervised. 

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the mother would not facilitate a meaningful relationship with the father – Change of residence ordered – One-month moratorium of no time with the mother.  FAMILY LAW – COSTS – The mother to pay the costs of the Independent Children’s Lawyer. 

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – one child, aged 6 – where the parents were in a drug-fuelled and violent relationship – where the father has not spent any time with the child since late 2020 – where the maternal grandparents have provided a great deal of care and support to the child – where the father seeks supervised time graduating to substantial and significant time – where the mother seeks that the father has no time and no communication with the child and that the child lives with her – where the maternal grandparents seek that the child live with the mother unless the Court considers she would pose an unacceptable risk of harm, in which case they would then seek the child live with them – where the Court considers that the child should live with the mother and share parental responsibility with the maternal grandparents – where the Court considers that the father should spend no time and no communication with the child – best interests of the child.    

FAMILY LAW – application for review – parenting only interim orders – should the children continue to spend time with the father supervised – should the children spend time with the father in accordance with final orders made 3 April 2023 – where the parties are unable to communicate effectively – where there is significant parental conflict - the children at risk of emotional and psychological harm letter to the children from judicial officer – Independent Children’s Lawyer to give letter to children 

FAMILY LAW – practice and procedure – application to adjourn hearing for review of a Senior Judicial Registrar’s decision with respect to urgent interim parenting orders  

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – the Mother has a long history, starting in high school, of significant drug use which she says arises in times of “stress” – the Mother has stopped her own supervised time with her young daughter at a supervised contact centre – the young child, aged approximately 5 years, has lived primarily with the Father for the last three years – yet the Mother ran a case seeking that the child should change residence from the Father and live primarily with her – the longest period the Mother has been drug free has been 18 months – for all of this, the Mother still holds down a good job in the public service and has been candid with her employer and managers that she uses illicit drugs on a semi-regular basis – Mother also has a history of not completing drug rehabilitation – best interests considerations – child to continue to live with the Father, Mother to undergo regime of hair-follicle testing before re-commencement of supervised time. 

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the subject child is 7 years of age – Where the child has spent supervised time with the father for a period of two years – Where both parties have unilaterally taken the child overseas post separation - Where there are significant allegations of family violence perpetrated against the mother and the child by the father –Where the mother seeks orders that the child spend no time with the father - Where the father alleges that the mother’s partner has sexually abused the child – Where despite the father’s allegations of sexual abuse perpetrated by the mother’s new partner he seeks that the child live with the parties on an equal shared care arrangement – Where the Father alleges the mother has fabricated allegations to alienate the child from him - Where the father relies on the mother allowing unsupervised time between him and the child post separation as the basis of the orders sought by him – Findings made that the father perpetrated family violence including coercive and controlling behaviours upon the mother and the child – Finding made that the father cannot positively support a relationship between the child and the mother – Finding that the parties’ parenting relationship is reflective of a dynamic arising from the father’s controlling family violence - Finding that the family violence perpetrated by the father is a contradiction to an order for equal shared parental responsibility - Finding that the culmination of risks posed by the father cannot be sufficiently ameliorated by supervision or otherwise – Orders made that the child spend no time with the father.  

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for review – Interim parenting – Substantive review of a Senior Judicial Registrar’s decision – Hearing de novo – Application dismissed     

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Interim proceedings –  Children aged 12 and seven years – Where one child remains in the father’s care and the other remains in the mother’s care – Previous shared care arrangements – High conflict – Allegations of coercive and controlling family violence – Weight to attach to children’s wishes – Orders made pending Family Assessment Report. 

FAMILY LAW – where the mother of the child has recently died – where the step father wants to take the child to Country B for funeral rituals – where the biological father seeks a watchlist order and restraint on the child from being removed from Australia – Country B not Hague convention country – where biological father alleges deceased mothers family prevented him from having relationship with the child – where family violence alleged during the relationship between the mother and biological father –  where biological father has not seen six year old child for three years – where the biological father believes the step father will leave the child in Country B with maternal grandparents – watchlist order denied – where the maternal grandfather also made an undertaking in court  that he ensured the child returns to Australia – where the stepfather has substantial ties to Melbourne – all other extant applications adjourned  

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where an application is brought by the stepfather of the subject child who is 11 years of age – Where the biological mother of the child passed away in 2023 in Country C - Where the child has resided in Australia, Country B and Country C –– Where the respondent father asserts the stepfather’s behaviour toward the child presents a cumulative risk that the stepfather is engaging in grooming style behaviour - Where the child has been living with the respondent father in Australia since the death of the biological mother in 2023 – Where the stepfather has spent supervised time with the child in Australia and now seeks orders that he spend time with the child for half of each school holiday period internationally or in Australia and for one weekend each month in Australia – where the child has expressed strong views about spending time with the stepfather – Orders made for the child to spend supervised time with the stepfather on an interim basis. 

FAMILY LAW - PROPERTY SETTLEMENT - Where the wife seeks significant notional add backs to the property pool – Where such add backs are rejected - Where it is just and equitable to make an adjustment – Where a two pool approach is appropriate noting the substantial amount of superannuation held by the husband and where the husband seeks a superannuation splitting order – Where the husband has made higher financial contributions – Where the wife has been and continues to be the primary carer for the children, one of whom has special needs – Where at issue is the mix of superannuation and non-superannuation property each party is to receive - Where the children spend significant and substantial time with the husband – Contribution finding made in favour of the husband – Adjustment made in favour of the wife for future needs.

FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Costs – Parenting – Where it was alleged the father contravened by overholding the child following periods of time spending – Where the father admitted the breaches at the commencement of Trial but maintained he had a reasonable excuse – Where after giving evidence at Trial, the father plead guilty to each count without reasonable excuse – Father to enter into a Bond – Orders for costs. 

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where there is significant agreement as to the facts and the assets to be divided – whether there should be a one or two pool approach – impact of the Husband’s initial contributions – impact of the Wife having primary care of a child with special needs and an inferior income.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING - whether the impact on the mother’s parenting capacity of nearly four year old child spending time with his father is such that the child should spend no time with his father

FAMILY LAW - PARENTING AND PROPERTY – undefended hearing –– de facto relationship 16 years- two children – mother has sole care since separation in 2021 -no binding financial agreement – purported financial agreement set aside – alternation of property interests

FAMILY LAW – parenting – family violence – sole parental responsibility – father has not seen the children since separation – where the father shows lack of insight and failure to address his behaviour – where the father poses an unacceptable risk to the children – whether or not orders should be made for no time or for supervised time – whether time should be graduated to unsupervised – whether or not orders should be made for family therapy – airport watchlist and passport orders

FAMILY LAW – SINGLE EXPERT WITNESS – application for removal – earlier valuation for third party bank – independence of single expert– duties – non-disclosure of earlier valuation – materiality – selection of single expert – remediation if non-disclosure - application disallowed

FAMILY LAW – Harman and/or implied obligation – are special circumstances required the documents in another court – whether special circumstances in this application – very late application – whether costs should be ordered – special circumstances found – applicant released from implied obligation

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – interim application after matter not reached – stood over till final hearing date

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – two male children aged 11 and 9 – second round of parenting proceedings – where the parties consented to final orders in December 2018 – where the parties had difficulty implementing the final orders – where the parties’ communication was unproductive – where the two boys where being dragged into the conflict by both parents – where the relationship between the father and the children began to break down in part due to disclosures of physical abuse in the father’s care by the children – where the children became resistant to spending time and communicating with the father – where the children are now estranged from the father and fearful of him – where the Court considers there would be an emotional or psychological risk to the children if they were required to spend time with the father – best interests of the children.

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Allegations of physical, sexual and financial abuse – No findings of fact sought – No risk established – Parenting capacity – Children to live with father and spend time with mother

FAMILY LAW – Final Parenting – Allegations of physical, emotional, psychological and financial abuse – Criminal convictions – Unacceptable risk – Children to live with mother and spend no time with father

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Assessment of risk – Where Father subject of shooting – where Father previously convicted of offences – where Mother previously convicted to driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs – where each parent has history of drug use – Where Mother has history of mental health issues – where Father has mental health vulnerabilities – Allegations of family violence – Determination of parental responsibility