Sydney, Australia -- (SBWIRE) -- 09/17/2013 -- A father appealed the order made by Foster FM which rejected his bid to have the mother application for parenting order dismissed. Two years after their separation the mother, moved with their child to M, south of Sydney. It was at this time that the respondent father applied for injunction and parenting orders, to restrain the mother from relocating the child outside the Eastern suburbs of Sydney.
In March 2004 the parties married and their child was born in the same year. They separated on Valentine’s Day in 2005. The child lived primarily with her mother and by arrangement spent time with the father. Shortly after their separation, the father began to live with his current partner. The mother decided to move to M with the child on September 18, 2007 and she enrolled the child at a preschool there to commence in 2008.
Until February 6, 2008, the father spent time with the child in M. In February 2008, the mother and Mr. C began dating. On February 6, 2008, the father commenced proceedings in the Federal Magistrates Court in Sydney.
Interim parenting orders were made on February 25, 2008 which restrained the mother from relocating the child’s residence outside of the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney. The mother was required to return with the child to Sydney no later than March 3, 2008 and if she fails to do so the child shall live with the father.
Le Poer Trench JJ dismissed the appeal of the father and upheld the trial judge’s reasons. It was correctly held that there has been a significant change in the circumstances of the mother and the child. The child has already started school in M. the mother got married to Mr. C and they have a child. The interim parenting orders imposed hardship and expenses on the mother because it meant that she and the child would have to constantly travel back and forth from M to Sydney and back.
It was held that in all parenting cases the court’s task is to take steps with the child’s best interests as the paramount consideration. It was found that the child was being placed in a difficult situation or “fractured” circumstances. There was a need for her to have a primary residence and stop her exposure to the conflict between her parents. Therefore, it was concluded that allowing the mother’s application to proceed was properly made and does not warrant appellate interference.
About Alan Weiss
Alan Weiss established aussiedivorce.com.au in 2005. Today, we are Australia leading boutique family law website. We have divorce lawyers in Sydney, divorce lawyers in Melbourne, divorce lawyers in Brisbane.
Copyright © 2005-2013 - SBWire, The Small Business Newswire - All Rights Reserved - Important Disclaimer
Contact Us: 888-4-SBWIRE (US) - 920-593-5640 (International)