When parents separate, one of the hardest questions is: “What arrangements are in my child’s best interests?” If parents can’t agree, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia can make parenting orders. The law does not ask what is “fair” to each parent. It asks what arrangements best promote…
Blog
Reversal of Care
Reversal of care in parenting cases (when the Court changes who the children live with) “Reversal of care” is shorthand for a parenting outcome where the Court orders that children stop living primarily with the current carer (often the parent they have been living with for some time) and instead…
Pickford & Pickford [2024] FedCFamC1A 249 — why it matters in children’s cases (procedural fairness and family violence findings)
Overview In Pickford & Pickford the Full Court (Division 1 appellate jurisdiction) allowed a father’s appeal from final parenting orders because the first-instance process miscarried in a way that denied procedural fairness, and because multiple findings that the father perpetrated “family violence” (particularly coercive/controlling behaviour) were not legally or factually…
Navigating the New Family Law Landscape: Key Changes in the Family Law Amendment Act 2023
Welcome to our law firm’s blog, where we keep you informed about the latest legal developments. Today, we’re focusing on the Family Law Amendment Act 2023, a transformative piece of legislation that significantly impacts family law proceedings in Australia. Whether you’re a parent navigating a separation, a legal professional, or…
Property and finances after separation
Your entitlements with respect to your property settlement are based on the principles of property division set out in the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”). The Court has a wide discretionary power based on the facts of each case. Generally speaking there are five steps which are followed…
Child Support
Child support is assessed by the Child Support Registrar c/- the Australian Government Department of Human Services (DHS). This is done by applying a formula under Part 5 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989. In the words of the Full Court, in the renowned case of Gyselman [1991] FamCA…
Importance of procedural fairness
Sagilde & Magee [2018] FamCAFC 143 Mother denied procedural fairness where expert’s recommendation for no time was made for the first time from the witness box. In this case the Full Court heard the mother’s appeal against a parenting order made by the Family Court of Western Australia that the…
Indefinite orders for supervision are not in the best interests of children
Bronson & May (No. 2) [2017] FCCA 2317 This is an interesting case regarding indefinite orders for supervised time and Court’s approach to the Rice & Asplund rule at a preliminary hearing. There was a final parenting order in place which was made in 2015 requiring father’s time with the…
Finality is good but justice is better
Geisler [2018] FCCA 3959 (delivered on 10 December 2018, but published 5 March 2019) In a very interesting case, the Court granted an adjournment of the trial for twelve (12) months in order to permit assessment of children’s time with the father away from “artificial environment” of contact centre. Both…
Property Division – Paid legal fees – Adding back approximately $437,000 in legal fees
Trevi [2018] FamCAFC 173 Notional add-backs do not offend Stanford. Court’s approach to paid legal fees. Trial judge erred by declining to add back $437,000 paid by wife for her legal fees. In this case the Full Court heard the husband’s appeal against trial judge’s property order made after a…
Recent Comments