, , , , ,

Family Law Amendment Act 2023 (Parenting)

Family Law Amendments

The Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 provides for significant changes to the family law system in Australia. These amendements will likely prove to be as significant as the Family Law Reform Act 1995; and the Howard Government 2006 amendments to the Family Law Act 1975 (“FLA”) that these reforms will largely displace.

At the date of writing this, the Bill has passed both Houses of Parliament (as of 19 October 2023) and received Royal Assent on 6 November 2023.

The genesis of these amendments is primarily from the Australian Law Reform Commission’s Final Report No 135: Family Law for the Future – An Inquiry into the Family Law System. The 2023 Bill implements elements of Government responses to the Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Family Law System.[1]

The scope of this article is to examine the following key elements of the Family Law Amendments to come:

  • Priority to be assigned to children’s safety issues.
  • Repealing the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility contained with section 61DA FLA.
  • Replacing the current “best interest” factors in section 60CC(2) and (3) FLA with a new list of factors.
  • Increased prominence to children’s views; and
  • Clarifying the role of Independent Children’s Lawyers.

There are further significant changes from these Family Law Amendments relating to parenting matters that will not be expanded upon herein, but they include:

  • Amendment to the Objects and Principles in section 60B. In the 2006 amendments, these changes added context and overlapped with best interest factors. Interestingly this amendment is very narrow and very broad at the same time. The objects single out safety as a specific object and then refer generally to the Convention on the Rights of the Child – New York 20 November 1989 – which is a broad range of issues.
  • Simplification and clarification to the process for dealing with contravention of Orders.
  • Process concerning vexatious litigants.
  • Changes and simplification to law concerning publication of information regarding family law matters and parties.
  • Regulation of Family Report Writers.
  • Case management process.

It should also be noted that significant changes to property divisions of the Family Law Act are also making their way through the parliamentary process with the Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 No2.

When will these Family Law Amendments occur?

The 2023 Bill has passed both houses and it received Royal Assent from the Governor General on 6 November 2023.

The Bill sets out commencement provisions in a table providing for a transition to the new system 6 months after proclamation for the majority of the substantive provisions. Thus, amendments relating to Objects, Parental Responsibility and Best Interest Factors, Contravention Applications, Independent Children’s Lawyers Duties and Hague Convention matters, Case Management and Procedures, Publication of Family Law Proceedings, communications and identifying parties and Family Report writers, will take effect from 6 May 2024.

Priority to children’s safety issues

As stated above, section 60B concerning the “objects and principles” is to be repealed and substituted for 2 objects. These are (paraphrased):

  1. Ensure the best interests of children are met by ensuring their safety[2].
  2. Give effect to Convention on the Rights of the Child done at New York on 20 November 1989[3].

In terms of matters that relate to the “safety” of children, the Bill does not repeal definitions contained within FLA of “Abuse”[4] or Family Violence[5]. Notably, section 4AB(3) definition of family violence provides:

For the purposes of this Act, a child is exposed to family violence if the child sees or hears family violence or otherwise experiences the effects of family violence.

Thus, there are numerous factual situations that can be relevant to the object of ensuring the safety of a child, with family violence and exposure to family violence likely to be a prominent consideration.

With respect to the second limb of the objects, the Convention Articles 1 to 41 in Part 1 refers to a wide range of matters including the following examples:

  • Freedom from discrimination – race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.
  • Ensure the child has such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being.
  • A child shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis, save in exceptional circumstances, personal relations and direct contacts with both parents.
  • States parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child.
  • Parents (or guardians) have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern.

The above are just some examples of matters covered by the convention and it behoves family law practitioners to become familiar with the contents. Many of the Convention Articles also cover matters which relate to ensuring the safety of children, overlapping with the new section 60B(a).

The former version of section 60B also made it clear it was an object of the FLA to, inter alia, “protect children from physical or psychological harm from being subjected to, or exposed to, abuse, neglect or family violence”. The new section 60B(a) omits the word “neglect” however neglect is referred to in the new section 60CC(2)(a).

There is a clear focus on safety issues and these changes are not occurring in a vacuum. Family Violence is a high-profile political issue nationwide, and as of August 2023 in Queensland significant changes occurred in Domestic and Family Violence legislation. These changes included:

  • Amendments to the Criminal Code and definitions.
  • For cross applications – changes with respect to the way in which applications are heard and to identify which applicant may be in greater need of protection.
  • Use of criminal and domestic violence history and a requirement for this information to be made available.
  • Wider power to award costs.
  • Reopening of proceedings where orders were made in the absence of the respondent and rules of substituted service of the respondent.
  • Explanations with respect to what constitutes evidence of domestic violence.
  • Directions to a jury in criminal proceedings involving domestic violence.
  • Transitional provisions.

You can read about these changes in our article here.

Practitioners will need to consider responses to Protection Order Applications very carefully given the broader consequences for Parenting Proceedings after these Family Law Amendments.

The old and new section 60B both refer to protecting children however the 2023 Bill’s removal of a reference to rights of children, for example, children’s right of having the benefit of both of their parents (and other significant persons) meaningful involvement in their lives, adequate and proper parenting, ensuring parents fulfil their duties, and meet their responsibilities, etc. The changes appear to elevate the protective concerns and relegate the former rights and duties to the broad range of matters referred to in the Convention.

Further emphasis of the priority to be afforded to safety is contained within the amendments to the best interest factors discussed below.

Presumption of equal shared parental responsibility removed in Family Law Amendments

Two of the Howard Government’s most significant amendments to the determination of parenting matters were the introduction of 61DA and section 65DAA.

Sections 61DA and 65DAA relate to the creation of the rebuttable presumption that equal shared parental responsibility is in the best interests of a child[6]; and specifying the pathway for the Court to take in determining a parenting matter where the presumption applies[7]. The presumption does not apply to matters where there are reasonable grounds to believe a parent had engaged in family violence or abusive behaviour.

The pathway provides for consideration of equal time (subject to best interests and reasonable practicability) before moving to consider “substantial and significant time” (again subject to best interests and reasonable practicability) before looking at other time should the former two considerations be ruled out (subject to best interests).

The changes in 2006 had a significant effect on the conduct of interim applications, as set out in the decision of Goode v Goode[8]. The often-cited case with respect to the conduct of interim proceedings prior to that time was Cowling v Cowling[9]. Put simply, Cowling provided that on an interim application the best interests of children were usually served by maintaining the status quo of the arrangements prior to the application.

Goode v Goode had the effect of displacing Cowling and Cowling’s significance due to the necessity of following the pathway in section 65DAA when the equal shared parental responsibility presumption applied. Over time in practice the Court “side stepped” the necessity of applying the pathway in Goode v Goode on an interim application by not making any Order allocating Parental Responsibility. Section 61DA(3) provides:

When the court is making an interim order, the presumption applies unless the court considers that it would not be appropriate in the circumstances for the presumption to be applied when making that order.

 The Bill repeals sections 61DA, 61DB and 65DAC and substitutes a new section 61DAA which provides:

61DAA Effect of parenting order that provides for joint decision‑making about major long‑term issues

  • (1) If a parenting order provides for joint decision‑making by persons in relation to all or specified major long‑term issues in relation to a child, then, except to the extent the order otherwise specifies, the order is taken to require each of the persons:
    1.  (a) to consult each other person in relation to each such decision; and
    2.  (b) to make a genuine effort to come to a joint decision.
  • (2) To avoid doubt, this section does not require any other person to establish, before acting on a decision about the child communicated by one of those persons, that the decision has been made jointly.

The notable differences between the new and old sections are:

  • The removal of the word “parental” and substituting the language to refer to “decision making responsibility”. Part 2 of the 2023 Amendment Bill refers to Parental Responsibility in the heading.
  • Removal of section 65DAC – and specifically subsection 2 that requires a decision regarding major long-term issues to be made jointly. The new section simply requires consultation and a genuine effort to come to a joint decision.

Therefore, it seems it will no longer be a breach of a Parenting Order allocating shared decision making if a party unilaterally decides to change a child’s school, initiate a medical procedure, change a child’s name or relocate a child’s residence etc, provided there has been consultation and a genuine effort to reach agreement. The effect of this is unclear, and there will likely need to be clarification as matters involving these issues are litigated.

An immediate observation is that under the section 65DAC requirements, the litigation typically occurred before a decision was made on a major long-term issue. Now it appears to be likely that any litigation will occur subsequently – when changing a child’s circumstances post decision may be a significant consideration with respect to best interests.

Understanding the new factors – what do they mean in practice?

The Howard Government repealed the old section 68F and replaced it with section 60CC(2) and (3) best interest factors. The 2006 changes further introduced two categories of factors – “primary and additional” with the two primary considerations relating to the child having a meaningful relationship with both parents and the need to protect children from harm.

The 2023 Family Law Amendments amend section 60CC and removes these two categories and replaces them with “general considerations” and “additional considerations” (with the latter solely referring to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture issues).

The new general considerations in subsection 2 are:

  •  (1) Subject to subsection (4), in determining what is in the child’s best interests, the court must:
    1. consider the matters set out in subsection (2); and
    2. if the child is an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child—also consider the matters set out in subsection (3).
  • (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a), the court must consider the following matters:
    1.  (a) what arrangements would promote the safety (including safety from being subjected to, or exposed to, family violence, abuse, neglect, or other harm) of:
      1.  (i)the child; and
      2. (i) each person who has care of the child (whether or not a person has parental responsibility for the child);
    2.  (b) any views expressed by the child;
    3.  (c) the developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs of the child;
    4.  (d) the capacity of each person who has or is proposed to have parental responsibility for the child to provide for the child’s developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs;
    5.  (e) the benefit to the child of being able to have a relationship with the child’s parents, and other people who are significant to the child, where it is safe to do so;

anything else that is relevant to the particular circumstances of the child.

 The protective factors in section 2)a) above are further amplified by section 2A which provides that in considering the matters in section 2)a) the Court must also consider:

  • History of family violence, abuse or neglect involving the child or a person caring for the child.
  • Any Family Violence Order applied to the child or member of the child’s family.

Subsection 4 relates to Consent Orders and widens the Court’s discretion. For Consent Orders in a parenting matter the Court is no longer required to be satisfied as to best interests but “may, but is not required to, have regard to all or any of the matters set out” in section 60CC(2) or (3).

In terms of the differences between the 2006 best interest factors and the 2023 Family Law Amendments, the following differences stand out:

  • As stated above, there is a clear move away from primary and additional factors. The amendments to section 60CC refer to general and additional consideration however the additional considerations only relate to cultural issues for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. There is no priority given to any of the general considerations in the 2023 Bill.
  • The wording of the factors for protective issues have changed. The former version of section 60CC(2)(b) referred to “the need to protect the child from… harm”. The new section 60CC(2)(a) refers to “what arrangements would promote the safety…of the child and each person who has care of the child.”

Like previous legislation listing Best Interest factors, the 2023 Bill contains a broad statement in section 60CC(2)(f) which provides for “anything else that is relevant to the particular circumstances of the child.” Thus, the matters the Court can have regard to are not limited and will depend on the facts of each case. However, the following factors from the prior version of section 60CC have been removed and not replaced specifically:

  • The nature of the child’s relationship with parent’s or other persons such as grandparents.
  • The extent to which each parent has participated in decision making about major long terms issues, spending time, and communicating.
  • The extent to which a parent has fulfilled or failed to fulfill maintenance obligations.
  • The likely effect of a change in the child’s circumstances.
  • Practical difficulties and expense of spending time.
  • Maturity, sex, lifestyle and background of the child and parents.
  • Attitude towards the child and responsibilities of parenthood demonstrated by each of the child’s parents.
  • Whether it would be preferable to make an Order less likely to lead to institution of further proceedings.

The tone of the Howard Government amendments seemed to elevate the status of a parent. The above factors that were omitted refers specifically to parents in many instances, along with the changes to 60B, and removal of the phase “parental responsibility” from the new section 61DA seems to indicate parents and people caring for a child have no distinction.  The new section 60CC(2)(e) is similar in language to the old section 60CC(2)(a) however it also refers to “other people who are significant to the child” and not parents exclusively as the former provision did.

How will a child’s views be given greater prominence and independent children’s lawyers?

Children’s views have featured in each version of the Best Interest Factors:

  • Pre 2006 – section 68F(2) – any wishes expressed by the child and any factors (such as age and level of maturity or level of understanding) that the Court thinks are relevant to the weight it should give to the child’s wishes.
  • 2006 – section 60CC(3)(a) – any views expressed by the child and any factors (such as maturity or level of understanding) that the Court thinks are relevant to the weight it should give to the child’s views.
  • Post 6 May 2024 – section 60CC(2)(b) – any views expressed by the child.

The new wording removes the reference to factors such as maturity and level of understanding however it is safe to assume judicial officers will continue to take these circumstances into account (for younger children in particular).

Currently children’s views are typically determined and communicated to the Court through the Family Report interview process. Independent Children’s Lawyers (“ICL”) and Judges can meet with children to determine their views – however this rarely occurs in practice. This will change post 6 May 2024 with amendments to section 68LA making it mandatory for ICL’s to meet with children unless exceptional circumstances apply.

In the Family Law Amendments, section 68LA(5) provides that an ICL must meet with the child and provide the child with an opportunity to express any views to which the proceedings relate. The ICL can determine when, how often and how meetings take place; and when, how often and how the child is provided with the opportunity to express a view[10].

The ICL is not required to meet with the child if:

  • The child is aged under 5 years.
  • The child does not want to meet with the ICL.
  • There are exceptional circumstances that justify not meeting with the child[11].

Exceptional circumstances include if performing the duty would:

  • Exposing the child to the risk of physical or psychological harm that cannot be managed safely.
  • Have a significant adverse effect on the wellbeing of the child[12].

If the ICL proposes to not perform the duty, before making Final Orders the Court must:

  • Determine whether it is satisfied the exceptional circumstances exist.
  • If the circumstances do not exist – make an Order requiring that the ICL meets with the child and that the child has an opportunity to express his or her views[13].

The above is likely to amount to a significant change in the process in matters where an ICL is appointed and underscores that the 2023 Bill places an emphasis on children being heard in the proceeding. Another effect may be less resort to Impact Reports and Family Reports in cases where children are older, more mature, and able to articulate a clear view.

Other matters and conclusion

Further changes of interest are the insertion of the “overarching purpose of the family law practice and procedure provisions” in section 95. To paraphrase these provisions to facilitate the just resolution of disputes, matters must be conducted in a way:

  • Ensure safety of families and children.
  • Consistent with best interests being paramount.
  • According to law.
  • Resolution as quickly, inexpensively, and efficiently as possible.
  • Just determination of proceedings.
  • Efficient use of judicial and administrative resources.

The above also needs to be read in the context of section 96 which places duties upon parties and practitioners. Parties are required to conduct proceedings consistently with the overarching purpose while lawyers have a duty to:

  • Take account of the duty of parties.
  • Assist a party to comply with the duty.

Section 96 also provides the Court may take into account failure to discharge the above duties in making Costs Orders[14] and that the Court has a discretion to make such Costs Orders against lawyers personally – that cannot be recovered from the client[15].

In conclusion 2024 will see a significant shake up to the way in which practitioners will need to approach parenting matters and the conduct of proceedings. Similarly, to the years following the 2006 amendments, there will likely be further guidance provided by important cases clarifying what the changes mean in practice. In the meantime, practitioners should familiarise themselves with the amendments and be cognisant of their duties towards the overarching purpose.

Peter Hooper and Shaun Mill specialise in all areas of Family Law. Please contact us here or call us on 3207 7663 if you require assistance wtih your family law matter.

 

[1] Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 – Attorney General Department – Citizens Space.

[2] Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 section 60B(a).

[3] Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 section 60B(b).

[4] Section 4 – an assault including sexual assault or involving a child in sexual activity directly or indirectly.

[5] Section 4AB – violent or threatening behaviour, coercive behaviour, assault, sexual assault and abuse, stalking, derogatory taunts, intentionally damaging property, injury or death to an animal, unreasonably denying financial autonomy or financial support to meet reasonable living expenses, keeping family or cultural connections, depriving liberty.

[6] Section 61DA

[7] Section 65DAA

[8] [2006] FamCA 1346 (15 December 2006)

[9] [1998] FamCA 19

[10] Section 68LA(5AA)

[11] Section 68LA(5B)

[12] Section 68LA(5C)

[13] Section 65LA(5D)

[14] Section 96(4)

[15] Section 96(5) and (6)

,

Divorce in Australia – What does it mean in 2021? – Does our society still value marriage?

There’s no doubt 2020 has been a difficult year. I don’t need to state the obvious or recap on what everyone already knows. 

I personally know how hard 2020 was for many people because in the latter half of 2020 my practice has been really busy and many other family lawyers in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast have told me they are in the same boat.

My belief is that as family lawyers we are in the business of “damage control”. Our role is to help minimise the inevitable damage relationship breakdown creates financially, for children, in terms of our society, and I think many of my colleagues would feel the same way. It’s understandable that people feel cynical about lawyers and the law, it’s confusing, expensive and painful.  

Prevention is better than cure

One of the first things any good family lawyer should discuss with you is prospects for reconciliation. 

Frankly this is the best resolution possible. No legal fees, no halving your net worth, no seeing your children according to a schedule.

It’s better for society as well. Children grow up to be better adults in homes free from conflict with two parents, the social security system is less likely to be called upon and people typically live longer in happy marriages. That’s not to say that anyone ought to put up with a toxic relationship either.

There are many very talented Marriage Counsellors available to help reconcile a marriage or relationship and typically their services are more emotionally rewarding and (significantly less expensive) than the services of a family law solicitor.

The Family Law Act 1975 also mandates that lawyers have a responsibility to help people resolve their issues before moving to what the lawyers do, which is sorting out the separation. Section 12C and 12E Family Law Act 1975 require lawyers to provide information regarding reconciliation services.

The often cited and well-known quote from Abraham Lincoln applies here as it does in every area of legal practice:

Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser – in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough.

Getting a Divorce

Since 1975 there is only one ground for Divorce in Australia which is the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage evidenced by a period of 12 months separation. 

Before this there were various grounds such as “adultery” etc that made this difficult area even more emotionally charged when it was required to establish fault by one party. On the other hand, some people may argue the current system makes it much easier to obtain a Divorce or encourages Divorce. However, the Family Law Act 1975 also provides that the principles to be applied by the Courts in exercising their jurisdictions must have regard to, inter alia (Latin for “among other things”):

  1. The need to preserve and protect the institution of marriage as the union of 2 people to the exclusion of all others voluntarily entered into for life.
  2. The need to give the widest possible protection and assistance to the family as the natural and fundamental group unit of society, particularly while it is responsible for the care and education of dependent children. (see section 43(1)(a) and (b)).

Section 50 provides some practical encouragement for people to be able to separate and get back together for a period of time. This section says that if a separation occurs, and the parties get back together (maybe to try and work things out), they can be back together for up to 3 months without having to “start over” on the 12 months continuous period of separation. 

For example, Romeo and Juliette decide to separate. They separate for 6 months then decide to get back together. They get back together for 2 months until Juliette realises Romeo just isn’t the same as he was 20 years ago, and they separate again. Juliette would still be able to apply for a Divorce after another 6 months and the 12-month period would not reset.

In terms of separation, this is a more complicated area of law than you might imagine. Section 49 of the Family Law Act specifies it only takes one party to the marriage make the decision to separate and that separation can involve people being 

Getting a Divorce is typically the final step usually the easiest and less complicated step speaking strictly in terms of the process. Emotionally it may be the most difficult.

A Divorce is simply “the termination of a marriage otherwise than by the death of a party to the marriage”. 

So, while many people may use that term to describe issues such as property settlement, parenting arrangements, spousal support, child support etc, the Divorce process only terminates the marriage.

All those big words

One of the interesting things about family law in Australia (and dare I say in other countries as well) is the different terminology different people use to describe aspects of the family law system.

Reason for this include the legislation changing the terminology over time. For example, in litigation involving children originally the terms were “custody and access”. In 1996 these terms were reformed to “residence and contact” and then in 2006 the terms changed again to the current “lives with and spends time with”. Nevertheless, in my experience very many people still talk about getting custody. Another reason for this (in my opinion) is that family law seems to be an area where people offer each other “barbeque advice”. This is the situation where someone knows someone who “went through a Divorce” and at a social function will provide information based on their experience as to how the system works.

The reason why all of this is relevant to the topic in the heading is because people often seek information regarding a Divorce when in actual fact a Divorce is just one aspect of a multifaceted system. 

If separation is inevitable you probably need information first and foremost. Family Law is incredibly complex and nuanced, and no lawyer can tell you what the outcome will be (ever). The more information we have in terms of the evidence the closer we get though.

Ultimately though our role is to help you to get you out of this situation with as much of your wallet, dignity and relationships intact as possible. 

Family law advice

If you have any queries in relation to separation, divorce, de facto relationships, property settlement or child support payments, my firm Hooper Mill Family Lawyers can assist you with practical advice. 

We are family lawyers servicing all areas in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast.

,

Parenting orders – holiday travel within Australia and overseas

With Christmas approaching and the world seemingly getting back to normal after Covid 19, many people will be thinking of taking a well-earned break to end 2020, either domestically or perhaps overseas.

Some people have family overseas and they may wish to take advantage of the holidays for a visit and to be reunited with loved ones. This is not at all an uncommon scenario with Australia hosting people from many diverse backgrounds, and unsurprisingly children from separated families may have grandparents or other extended family living in other countries.

Travel within Australia for separated families 

Separated parents will be faced with decisions for their children (their own and the other parent’s decisions) that may not have been an issue when they were together. In my experience, quite a common decision where disputes can arise is when one parent may want to take children on an interstate holiday. The reasons why this is an issue can be complex ranging from lack of trust post separation, concerns as to the capacity of the travelling parent to care for the child responsibly – to a parent feeling uncomfortable about a child being far away etc. 

The family law system recognises that making decisions for children is part of the responsibilities of parenthood. Further, where there is “equal shared parental responsibility”, section 65DAC Family Law Act 1975 (“the Act”) requires that parents consult with each other, make a genuine effort to make a joint decision, and that a decision is made jointly. This applies to decisions relating to “major long terms issues” defined in sections 4 of the Act as including things such as religion, health, change of name, living arrangements that would make a parent’s time significantly more difficult and education. 

An interstate holiday is not likely to be a major long-term issue. Section 65DAE of the Act provides that decisions that are not major long-term decisions don’t need to be made jointly and therefore an interstate holiday doesn’t need to be agreed to by the other parent. If there is an order, it would need to be taken during the travelling parent’s time – if children are at school it should be during school holiday time.

When an interstate holiday arises as an issue, sometimes a parent will seek a specific order regulating or preventing interstate travel. 

The Federal Circuit Court, Family Court or a State Court exercising jurisdiction under the Act has power to make this type of order in relation to a child. Section 64B(2)(i) allows the Court to make orders about “any aspect of the care, welfare or development of the child or any other aspect of parental responsibility for a child”. Further power is contained within section 68B to restrain a person from entering or remaining in a specific area.

An order pursuant to section 64B requires that the Court treat the “best interests of the child” as the paramount consideration for the Judge exercising his or her discretion. Thus, a parent seeking to restrict the travel would need to establish why the order sought is in the best interests of the child. 

For an injunction pursuant to section 68B the Court would have regard to best interests and whether the order was appropriate for the welfare of the child. 

International travel for separated families 

In this context I’m talking about an overseas holiday and not a decision to relocate overseas. An international relocation would be a major long-term issue and required to be made jointly where there is equal shared parental responsibility.

If a proceeding is before the Court, or a parenting order has been made, a party is not permitted to remove a child from Australia without permission. Section 65Y and Section 65Z make it an offence punishable by up to 3 years imprisonment to remove the child from Australia without the written consent of the other parties.

If you are in the process of negotiating a parenting order, and you would like to take a child on a holiday overseas, permission of the other party ought to be obtained and recorded in the parenting order. This can be done on an interim or final basis. If you already have a final order and missed including an international travel clause, you will need written permission to go. 

Usually conditions will be agreed to/placed on the travel such as sufficient notice before travelling, restrictions on what country having regard to Government travel information such as Smart Traveller, a copy of the itinerary being provided to the other party, and contact details while overseas.

If no agreement is reached by the parents, then once again the Court has power to make an order allowing the overseas travel on an interim or final basis (the same power as for interstate travel).

The Court will treat the best interests of the child as paramount once again in making the order. Typically, in this situation the Court will be balancing the benefit to the child in experiencing the travel against any risk that a parent may not return the children to Australia. This is not a legal requirement, but it is the most common reason in my experience why a parent raises an objection to travel. Like with any Court application, evidence would be required to demonstrate why there is a risk a parent won’t return to Australia.

If a parent has concerns and wants to prevent a child’s international travel, they can take steps to place the name of the child on the Family Law Watchlist through the Federal Police. This would prevent a child being removed pending an application to the Court being made with respect to the child. 

If a child’s name is placed on the Family Law Watchlist and later orders are made for travel, it is important to make sure that the child’s name has been taken off the Watchlist before travelling and take a copy of the sealed order to the airport with you.

Family law advice

If you have any queries in relation to separation, divorce, de facto relationships, property settlement or child support payments, my firm Hooper Mill Family Lawyers can assist you with practical advice. 

We are family lawyers servicing all areas in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast.

,

Tips for separating “successfully”

Separation is a very difficult time for many people which is not surprising given that typically it combines some form of loss with fear and uncertainty as to the future. 

Family lawyers are not counsellors but a good family lawyer ought to be able to empathise with the situation clients find themselves in; and provide some guidance as to what the best course of action will be in their circumstances.

The best solution for separation is reconciliation provided that underlying issues are addressed. The Family Law Act 1975 section 12C and 12E create obligations on legal practitioners to provide separating people with information regarding reconciliation services that may assist them. 

Often however once people have made the decision to attend the lawyer’s office, they have already explored every option to save the relationship and have arrived at their point of no return.

Everyone’s circumstances are different but, in my experience, the following tips can help make the process less stressful, costly and timelier.

What to do when you have just recently separated?

The very first thing in my view is to get family law advice. You can typically do this in an attendance at a lawyer’s office for a “first meeting” with a lawyer. 

The difficult part for clients is knowing which lawyer to choose, which can also be the most important part. 

For some people budget will make a difference. Many lawyers offer free initial consultations, some give a 20-minute free phone consultation and there are community legal centres available. The thing to remember here is “you get what you pay for”. 

My view is that the initial attendance is of critical importance in providing information that can affect the entire process or outcome of a client’s case. 

Because everyone has different situations and circumstances, I don’t believe a lawyer can be adequately assess a client’s needs, provide advice as to the law, process, evidence and costs within 20 minutes or just “over the phone”. But because lawyers sell their time, it must be costs effective for the lawyer to take the time and manage the client’s budget. 

We overcome this by placing no strict limit on the time a client attends upon us for the advice, while charging a “fixed fee”. Thus, the client doesn’t have to worry about looking at their watch and is free to explore all the questions they may have in an unrushed environment. In my experience at this first meeting, with a well-managed meeting, typically within 1 to 2 hours (at an average of 1 hour 30 minutes) most client’s report leaving our office “feeling better”, with an understanding of what they need to do moving forward. We also offer an after-interview phone call if there is something unclear or if a further question arises.

The information that we impart at this meeting covers issues such as:

  1. A summary of the law and how it applies to the client’s situation.
  2. An explanation of the processes available to resolve the matter by consent and processes if an agreement is not readily forthcoming.
  3. Provide a case strategy.
  4. Provide a strategy to get to an agreement with the other party, how to communicate and the steps most likely to maintain or promote amicable discussions.
  5. What to do and not to do in terms of proposed actions.
  6. Referral if necessary, to other information or service that may assist.
  7. As accurately as possible longer-term costs estimates, estimated costs for different outcomes/strategies, advice as to how to reduce legal costs, examining strategy and outcomes in the context of budget.

In essence, most legal services are about providing “damage control” for a client. “Cost exposure” is a necessary element of damage control, and also important in terms of the information a client needs to make commercial decisions.  

Equally important is expertise. You need to have confidence in the advice you are receiving because, frankly, you’re dealing with your life savings and your children in many family law matters. 

Family lawyers like anyone have different levels of experience and ability. Once thing that can help differentiate between lawyers is whether they are a “family law accredited specialist”. An accredited specialist has been through very rigorous further study, academic examinations, practical examinations and has had a minimum of 5 years’ experience.  Looking at a lawyer’s bio on their firm’s website can be helpful as well.

Some general tips to assist post separation 

From a practical perspective, after receiving initial advice and making contact with a lawyer, negotiations can commence. A negotiated outcome is by far the best outcome that can be achieved in family law. The quicker this can occur is better (and cheaper) still.

My view is that without some information and guidance from a lawyer you shouldn’t really start negotiations. The reason I say this is because unless you understand family law, you’re likely to get into an “information dispute” with the other party. Different people have different ideas about how the system works and if a clash arises, conflict which is counterproductive to negotiation, can result. 

Another reason is a party can become “positioned”. This means something discussed is agreed to or misunderstood, and it can be difficult to move away from later on (say after getting advice). If both parties get advice there should be a fair degree of overlap in terms of expected outcomes, making an agreement more likely.

Maintaining good communication is another tip. I’m not sure if this is ever easy post separation. If you are able to keep things as amicable as possible it will make resolution much more likely. I normally recommend for to people to keep communication “businesslike”, if possible, to negotiate in writing and to avoid “mirroring” if someone says something you don’t like. Mirroring is where someone says something irritating and the other person does the same in return, usually leading to an escalation in conflict.

It is most important though to remember that everyone’s case is different, and strategy should be tailored to your situation. There is no one size fits all in family law. 

Family law advice

If you have any queries in relation to family violence or parenting orders, my firm Hooper Mill Family Lawyers can assist you with practical advice. 

We are family lawyers servicing all areas in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast.

,

Domestic Violence Orders and Parenting Orders

It is not uncommon in family law parenting matters for issues of domestic violence to arise. Family violence is relevant evidence for the court to consider in determining what parenting order will be in the best interests of children. 

At the same time, a party to the parenting orders may have obtained a domestic violence order against the other party (or both parties may have orders) and often the children the subject of a parenting order will be named on a domestic violence order.

In my experience this can create confusion for people uncertain whether they can still interact with their children or the other party while an exclusion provision under a domestic violence order (such as not coming within 100 metres of a party or child’s school or residence), is in place,

What is the difference between Domestic Violence and Parenting Orders?

One difference between domestic violence orders and parenting orders is jurisdiction. Domestic violence orders are created under State legislation while parenting orders come under Commonwealth jurisdiction conveyed by the Family Law Act 1975.

Thus, different States have different law and names for these orders. The different State and Territory names are:

  • Queensland – Protection Orders. 
  • NSW – Apprehended Violence Orders.
  • ACT – Family Violence Order.
  • Victoria – Family Violence Intervention Order.
  • Tasmania – Family Violence Order or Police Family Violence Order.
  • South Australia – Intervention Order.
  • Western Australia – Restraining Order.
  • Northern Territory – Domestic Violence Order.

While the names are different, they all serve the same purpose which is to impose conditions on the Respondent to the order to do, or refrain from doing things such as:

  • Be of “good behaviour” and not commit domestic violence towards a person.
  • Not contact or approach a person or within a certain distance of a person.
  • Not approach within a certain distance of where a person works or lives. 
  • Other conditions that are authorised by the State legislation.

These orders are civil not criminal order, but a breach of an order is a criminal offense. 

Parenting orders typically regulate who children live with, how parents are to cooperate in making decisions for their children, and when and how a person spends time and communicates with their children. There is also power in the Family Law Act 1975 to make personal protection injunctions similar to the conditions in domestic violence orders. 

Obviously when one order is saying, for example, a person is not to come within 100 metres of a child or school, but a parenting order provides, that person is to collect the child from school at a certain time, conflict between the orders would appear to arise.

Resolving conflict between Domestic Violence Order and Parenting Orders

A situation similar to the above example recently arose in Tasmania in PQR v Sundram [2020] TASSC 21 where a Magistrate convicted a father of breaching a Police Protection Order when the father attended a school at various times to either speak to the principal and/or visit his daughter. 

The Magistrate dismissed some of the charges, but found him guilty on others, with the above case concerning a review of the charges he was convicted of. 

The issue was an earlier parenting order allowed the father to spend time with his daughter for certain periods of a fortnightly cycle, and that he collect her from school. The subsequent domestic violence order provided that the not come within 50 metres of his daughter or the school. 

Some of the charges related to times when the father was authorised by the parenting order to collect and spend time with the daughter; while other charges related to times not covered by the parenting order. 

The father argued that section 33 of the Tasmanian Family Violence Act 2004 provides, “…[a domestic violence order] operates subject to any Family Court order…” Also, the order with respect to coming within 50 metres of his child was expressed to be “except in accordance with an order of a court of competent jurisdiction…”. Not surprisingly he wasn’t convicted on the charges where he was authorised by the parenting order to spend time.

However, the domestic violence order preventing him from attending the school was not expressed to be “except in accordance with an order of a court of competent jurisdiction”. Therefore, the question was whether it was capable of co-existing with the parenting order. 

The Magistrate found that the father could collect the child from school without approaching within 50 metres of it. It was acknowledged this wasn’t ideal and might present other consequences, but it wasn’t inconsistent. The father was convicted with respect to the counts where he attended the school.

However on review Chief Justice Blow determined the order not to approach the school was “adjunct” to the order not to approach within 50 metres of the children, and neither operated during times that the father was to spend time pursuant to the parenting order.

This left one charge where the father attended the school outside of parenting order times. An argument was raised by counsel for the father that one of the parenting orders allowed for “equal shared parental responsibility”. Parental responsibility means “all the duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law parents have in relation to children”, and it was argued this also meant attending a school to speak with teachers. The Chief Justice determined that while the domestic violence order was an impediment to parental responsibility it was not inconsistent.

Queensland Domestic Violence Law

The relevant domestic violence legislation in Queensland is the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012. There are several sections of this legislation that refer to the interaction of family law orders and Protection Orders:

  • Section 5 and the dictionary schedule define “family law order”.
  • Section 78 requires the State court to “consider” a family law order.
  • Section 79 an applicant must disclose any family law order. 
  • Section 107D requires that a police officer issuing a Police Protection Notice ask about any family law order and not make a condition inconsistent with a family law order or apply to a Magistrate to have a proposed inconsistent condition made.

Within the Family Law Act 1975 section 68R empowers a State Magistrates Court in a domestic violence proceeding to revive, vary, discharge or suspend an existing order, injunction or arrangement under the Family Law Act.

Tips for Domestic Violence matters involving children

If you find yourself as the Respondent to a domestic violence proceeding, I recommend the following:

  • Get legal advice at an early stage. It is important that you speak to someone to give you some orientation and understanding of the laws, system and process you find yourself in. Legal services are expensive however most lawyers, my firm included, only charge a relatively modest fee for initial advice.
  • Make sure you participate in the court process. If you fail to attend court, you will have no control over the conditions on the Protection Order and a final order could be made in your absence. If you’re anxious about court, you can hire a family law solicitor to appear for you or sometimes a “duty lawyer” may be available to assist. In some circumstances you can seek Legal Aid assistance.
  • Tell the court about any family law orders or parenting plans that you have. Depending on the seriousness of the domestic violence allegations most Magistrates will want to ensure children’s rights to have contact with parents is advanced, provided it is consistent with their safety. 
  • If possible, have your lawyer negotiate on your behalf with the aggrieved. Most family violence orders will make exception for things such as communication via lawyers, attending other court or mediation or spending time and communicating with children. Make sure your orders contain these conditions.
  • Make sure you have read and understood the Protection Order conditions. If in doubt, ask your lawyer (or even the Magistrate) what the conditions mean. 
  • Abide by the conditions. Breaching a Protection Order is a criminal offence. 

Of the above my view is the first point and the last point are the most important. Get information early and make sure you don’t breach the order.

Family law advice

If you have any queries in relation to family violence or parenting orders, my firm Hooper Mill Family Lawyers can assist you with practical advice. 

We are family lawyers servicing all areas in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast.

, ,

What to expect when going to the Family Court

The vast majority of Family Lawyers will do everything they can to keep their client’s out of Court and try to settle the cases they run amicably (if possible) and as early on as possible to reduce legal costs. 

A good lawyer achieves this through making sure their clients are well advised as to the range of potential outcomes, has identified issues that may affect the range of outcomes, has worked to resolve information disputes by obtaining valuations and disclosure and provided their client with as accurate as possible costs estimates. This information allows a client to make an informed assessment of risk and weigh the cost/benefit of settling early.

Early settlements are also achieved by maintaining a respectful and non-confrontational communication style with the lawyer representing the other party or self-represented litigant. Third parties such as mediators are also of enormous assistance in resolving disputes at the early stages.

However, despite the best efforts of lawyers and parties sometimes it is necessary to file a proceeding in Court in order to move it forward or resolve a dispute that is intractable. 

To be frank, in any civilised society there is only two options to resolve a dispute, and they are by an agreement reached between the parties or by a Court making an order. 

What does it mean to go to Court?

For Family Law disputes there are three Courts that most often exercise the jurisdiction conferred by the Family Law Act 1975. These are:

  • State Magistrates Court exercising jurisdiction under the Family Law Act 1975. It is not often that a Family Law proceeding would be filed in a State Magistrates Court. Typically, a State Magistrate Court would only be involved to make a “Consent Order” and not hear a disputed matter.
  • The Family Court which is the “higher Court” exercising jurisdiction under the Family Law Act 1975. The Family Court typically hears matters that are more complex such as complex property matters, matters where serious allegation of risk towards children are made and other particular matters such as adoption or disputed medical procedures for children.
  • The Federal Circuit Court is the “workhorse” Court in Family Law matters. This Court is likely where your matter will be commenced, and this Court handles the majority of the “usual” property and parenting disputes.

Many people think that once their matter “goes to Court” it will be heard by the Judge at the first date and resolved. This is not the case. Once a matter is filed in Court a process commences that may take many Court appearances before a resolution can occur.

Why are there numerous Court appearance before a Judge can make a decision?

This is necessary because the reality is matters in dispute are numerous, Judges are few and Court time is expensive for the taxpayer. 

Once a matter is started in Court by filing an Application, the basic process is for the Court to make directions for evidence to be gathered before a “hearing” can occur and for the parties to make further attempts at negotiation or mediation.

The Court process is formal and must be fair to both parties so there are rules that must apply to how the matter is conducted and how the Court receives evidence. Thus, Court appearances have different designations as to what is to occur on a particular day. Again, agreements between the parties are encouraged and almost any agreement can be made, and the matter finalised, regardless of what the purpose of the day is.

The types of Court days are:

  • Mention or Directions – A “mention” is a Court date when the Judge will be informed as to what the matter is about, what the issues are, and what “directions” may need to be made for the collection of evidence or further Court dates. The first date after the Application and Response is filed is usually a mention unless there is some urgency to making an “interim” decision. In the vast majority of cases interim orders for children and what needs to occur by way of directions will be negotiated and agreed at the first Court date. 
  • Interim Application – This is a Court date when the Court must make a decision on a particular issue before the main hearing. Interim hearings are a short process of up to 2 hours duration only. This would occur for example where the interim parenting orders could not be agreed or in a property matter where assets needed to be protected, a party wanted to exclude another party from living at the home or a party needed maintenance or access to some funds. An interim hearing is conducted by affidavits without cross examination and therefore the Court cannot determine any disputed facts. 
  • Callover – This is when the Court will allocate a trial date if the matter is ready to proceed. Trial time is valuable so before allocating this time to a matter the Judge will want to know how many witnesses, how long the matter might take, whether any issues have been resolved etc.
  • Trial – This is likely the last Court date. A trial is where the parties are cross examined on their affidavit, lawyers make submissions and the Judge will make “finding of fact”. This means that after hearing the evidence the Judge will determine what evidence is found to be true. The Judge will then apply the relevant law to those facts.

There are other Court dates that can occur such as “Conciliation Conference” which are similar to mediation or Appeals if a party believes a Judge made an error. 

The good news is that most matters don’t make it all the way to a trial. Most matters settle at some point along the way once the benefit of further evidence is obtained, the Judge may focus attention on a particular issue, costs increase and as other issues are resolved creating motivation for closure.

What should you do when you’re in Court?

The Judge sitting in Court represents the authority of the State to determine a dispute. 

The origin of which date back to the early Norman Kings in England (who had the “divine right of Kings” i.e. said to be appointed by God) and allowed subjects to come before the King to determine disputes. This had a stabilising influence on society by establishing a “rule of law”. I said earlier there are two ways to determine a dispute in a “civilised” society i.e. an agreement or an order from the Court. Without the Court there would be agreements …or whoever was able to use force to get what they want. 

Thus, the Courts are imperative to maintaining a civilised society and it is very important the authority of the Court is respected.

Respect for the Court today means that while you’re in Court:

  • Bow to the Judge if the Judge is sitting at the bench when you enter or leave the Court room.
  • Do not wear any hat or have sunglasses on your head. Dress appropriately. You don’t have to wear a suit or tie if you’re not a lawyer but dressing appropriately communicates to the Court you respect the process you’re involved in. 
  • If you are speaking to the Judge the proper address is “your Honour”.
  • Do not speak to the person next to you in the gallery unless it is absolutely necessary. Sometimes lawyers will whisper to each other with last minute negotiations before their matter is called but this ought to be avoided. The Judge is focused on the matter before them and typically they don’t appreciate being distracted. 
  • Often when you are in Court and supporting a friend, or if it is your matter, you will hear something you don’t like or don’t agree with. In this situation keep your poker face. Don’t smile, roll your eyes, stare at someone, shake your head etc. Don’t be argumentative or rude – especially with the Judge.
  • If you’re self-represented or addressed by the Judge directly focus on listening and not on speaking. It is natural that you’ll want to tell the Judge all of your concerns however this is rarely appropriate unless you’re making submissions at a trial or interim hearing. More often than not this goes badly for the person speaking. The Judge might want specific information so to give that information and don’t try to qualify it or give context. There will be time for that later. The same applies if you’re being cross examined. It’s an exercise in listening and not speaking. Cross examination is where the other party is scoring their points. Your points are in your affidavit so just answer the questions as honestly and succinctly as possible, and if you don’t understand ask the question be repeated and/or say if you don’t understand.

There are fewer physical appearances while Covid 19 is upon us but the same rules apply if you’re appearing by video or phone.

Going to Court is stressful, especially if you find yourself in a trial. It is also expensive and time consuming and it is much preferred that a negotiated settlement can be reached. Before deciding to go to Court you should have a good reason why. You should know what the impediment to settlement is, what will the costs be financially and emotionally, and you need to have confidence in your Family Lawyer providing the advice you are relying on to make these decisions.

Family law advice

If you have any queries in relation to separation, divorce, de facto relationships, property settlement or child support payments, my firm Hooper Mill Family Lawyers can assist you with practical advice. 

We are family lawyers servicing all areas in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast.

, , ,

Can a step-parent adopt their partner’s child in Queensland?

It is permissible to adopt your partner’s child in Queensland, provided the process prescribed by law is followed. 

In Queensland the governing legislation is the state Adoption Act 2009 (Qld) (“AA”) and the Commonwealth Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“FLA”). The adoption process is conducted in the Family Court of Australia, a Queensland Magistrates Court (“Children’s Court”) and via the government department, Adoption Service Queensland – Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services (“DOCS”).

The effect of step-parent adoption is a person assumes parental responsibility and becomes a parent for the child of their married or de facto partner, while the biological parent ceases being a parent and ceases to have parental responsibility under the FLA. Any parenting orders that previously existed cease to be in force.

What is the adoption process?

The adoption process starts with an application filed in the Family Court for leave (i.e. permission) to enter your name in the expression of interest registrar with DOCS to adopt the subject child, and then make an application to the State Magistrates Court.

Section 60G FLA provides:

Family Court may grant leave for adoption proceedings by prescribed adopting parent:

  1. Subject to subsection (2)…the Family Court… may grant leave for proceedings to be commenced for the adoption of a child by a prescribed adopting parent.
  2. In proceedings for leave under subsection (1), the court must consider whether granting leave would be in the child’s best interests, having regard to the effect of paragraph 60F(4)(a), or paragraph 60HA(3)(a), and of sections 61E and 65J.

Note: Sections 60CB to 60CG deal with how a court determines a child’s best interests.

The requirements of this section were examined by Murphy J in Lowe and Anor & Clayton [2011] FamCA 1024. In this case the application was heard ex parte as the subject child’s biological father couldn’t be located. His Honour noted of the process, “It is somewhat odd that it is necessary to apply to one court for leave to apply to another court for an exercise of the latter’s ordinary jurisdiction. Nevertheless, that is the consequence of the provisions of the Family Law Act 1975.

1. FLA section 60HA(3)(a) and 60F(4)(a)
2. FLA section 61E
3.  FLA section 65J
4.  Lowe and Anor & Clayton [2011] FamCA 1024 at 3

In dealing with the ex parte application His Honour considered evidence from the mother as to the biological father’s whereabouts, her efforts to contact him, past history of significant family violence, his history of psychiatric illness and made an Order dispensing with the requirement for service. 

What are the requirements for leave to adopt a step child?

Section 60G requires that the court consider granting leave only if it is in the best interests of the child to do so, and having regard to:

  • In considering leave for the adoption proceedings to be commenced, best interests must be looked at in light of the fact the child will cease to be a child of the marriage for the purposes the FLA Section 4 FLA defines “child of the marriage” by reference to section 60F(1) to (4) as children to which children the FLA applies. The effect of this is a biological parent is effectively removed from being a person with standing (i.e. a person who is able) to bring an application in relation to the child for a parenting order This also applies to children of de facto relationships.
  • The court must consider that parental responsibility will be re allocated to another person.
  • The Court must consider the effect of existing parenting orders no longer being in effect after adoption.
  • The note to the section makes it clear that “best interests” is determined by reference to the matters that are typically considered by the court exercising jurisdiction pursuant to Part VII FLA in making a parenting order. 

In the decision referred to above Murphy J went on to hold that as an application pursuant to section 60G was “a child related proceeding”, Division 12A FLA also applied, which allows the judge to determine whether strict rules of evidence apply in conducting the hearing. Further, His Honour observed that also these applications are child related proceedings that section 96ZN ought to apply, which requires the court to consider the impact of the conduct of the proceeding on the child, and that the court actively direct and manage the proceeding to avoid undue delay, technicality and form. 

While the Family Court is not required to consider the matters to be determined by the Sate Magistrates Court these matters do bear upon whether the decision to grant leave is in the best interests of the child. 

Her Honour Hogan J said in Hurst and Anor & Chapman [2014] FamCA 506 that in considering section 208 AA the Family Court should not grant leave if appeared proceedings in a State court were doomed to fail because of non-compliance with mandatory prerequisites.

Another requirement of the AA section 16 and 175 is that the biological parent consents to the adoption. In the two cases referred to consent was not available because in one the biological parent was deceased, and in the other couldn’t be located. 

After leave to adopt has been granted

Once leave has been granted the process commences with the adopting parent’s name being entered in the expression of interest registrar with DOCS – Adoption Services Queensland.

This commences a process which culminates in a “suitability report” being produced which is put before the Children’s Court in ultimately determining the final adoption application. An approved form, known as a Form 7 commences this process.

5. Lowe and Anor & Clayton [2011] FamCA 1024 at 32
6. FLA section 60F(4)(a)
7.  However, section 65C(c) may allow a person with an interest in the care, welfare or development of a child standing to bring an application.
8. FLA section 60HA(3)(a)
9.  FLA section 61E
10.  FLA section65J
11.  Lowe and Anor & Clayton [2011] FamCA 1024 at 15
12. Lowe and Anor & Clayton [2011] FamCA 1024 at 16
13.  AA section 208
14. Lowe and Anor & Clayton [2011] FamCA 1024 at 20 to 22
15. Hurst and Anor & Chapman [2014] FamCA 506 at 8
16. AA sections 138 and 203
17.  AA sections 92 and 93

To be eligible to adopt the following must be established:

  • The applicant is a spouse (or de facto spouse) of a parent of the child.
  • The applicant has lived with the spouse parent and the child for a continuous period of at least 3 years.
  • Leave has been granted by the Family Court (as above).
  • The applicant is an adult and resident or domiciled within Australia.
  • The applicant and spouse are Australian citizens.
  • The subject child is agreed between 5 years and 17 years (an application for a child who is 17 can be made if the process can be completed before the child turns 18 and the grounds for the adoption are likely to exist.)

Consent of the biological parent

The general position is that the child’s parents must consent before the adoption can take place in Queensland. The AA provides for counselling to take place as part of this process.

In some circumstances the requirements for consent can be dispensed with, such as:

  • Applicant can’t establish the identity of the parent.
  • The applicant cannot locate the parent after all reasonable enquiries.
  • The parent is a lineal relative of the mother.
  • The conception was as a result of an offence by the relevant parent.
  • There would be unacceptable risk of harm to the child or mother if the relevant parent were made aware of the birth or proposed adoption.
  • Other special circumstances for giving dispensation. 

The term “exceptional circumstances” is referred to in section 208(f) (requirements for making a final Order) and the example given is “a parent of the child has died or cannot be located after making all reasonable enquiries.” 

18. 18.  AA section 92
19. AA section 16 and 175
20.  AA section 36(4)

Children’s Court

After the permission from the Family Court is granted to commence the adoption and all of the assessments have been made, an Application is filed in the Queensland Magistrates Court (sitting as the Children’s Court) for a final Order.

The final Order is made pursuant to section 208 AA and the requirements are:

  • The child is present in Queensland.
  • The step-parent is an adult resident or domiciled in Queensland.
  • The step-parent or their spouse is an Australia Citizen.
  • The suitability matters (referred to above) are satisfied.
  • An Order for the adoption would promote the child’s well being and best interests other than could be achieved via a Parenting Order made pursuant to the Family law Act 1975.
  • There are exceptional circumstances that warrant making an Order (such as death of the biological parent).

If you are considering adopting a step-child Hooper Mill Family Lawyers can guide you through the process and requirements.

Peter Hooper – Hooper Mill Family Lawyers Gold Coast and Brisbane – We are Family Law specialists, providing Expert Family Law advice and representation. 

,

Changes to promote domestic violence protection coming on 10 September 2019

The Federal government has enacted changes to the Family Law Act 1975 (FLA) that will prohibit the cross examination by self-represented parties in proceedings where there are family violence issues.

Family violence in the FLA means violent, threatening or other behaviours that coerces or controls a family member or causes them to be fearful.

The changes will apply when family violence is alleged in child custody, property settlement or spousal maintenance proceedings, and any one of the following situations also occur:

  • One of the party’s has been convicted or charged with an offence involving violence, or threatening violence to the other party. Typically, this would be a situation when a party has breached a domestic or family violence order or committed assault and has been charged or convicted.
  • A domestic or family violence order has been made under State legislation (such as a DVO, AVO or Protection Order – the terminology differs between States) and applies to both of the parties i.e. they are the aggrieved and respondent. While the new rules apply to family law matters which are under Commonwealth jurisdiction, domestic or family violence orders come under the powers of the States. Temporary orders aren’t relevant here, only a final order.
  • An injunction under Section 68B or 114 of the Family Law Act 1975 for the personal protection of either party has been made. This is effectively the Commonwealth version of a State domestic or family violence order.
  • The Court determines that cross examination by self-represented parties should not occur in the particular facts of the case. Thus, the Judge can decide the parties shouldn’t be permitted to cross examine each other.

Therefore, in family violence matters as set out above, the parties will need their own family law advice and divorce lawyer to conduct the cross examination for them.

We specialise in family law matters and can assist parties from Lismore to the Sunshine Coast, throughout Greater Brisbane, Northern NSW, Tweed and the Gold Coast with court representation and advice. Get in contact today and in an initial consultation we can give you guidance as to your options, likely outcomes and costs.

What if a party can’t afford legal advice or legal representation?

In these circumstances a party may apply to the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross Examination of Parties Scheme, to have a family lawyer and barrister appointed for them to conduct the cross examination.

Applying for a lawyer will be done via the state Legal Aid offices, is not merit or means tested and the application must be made at least 12 weeks before the final hearing.

This means that regardless of your financial circumstances you will be able to have the lawyer represent you for the cross examination.

We are Legal Aid Queensland panel solicitors and can assist you with applying for Legal Aid as well as Legally Aided court representation.

When is cross examination necessary?

Cross examination of a witness in family law cases usually only occurs at a final hearing.

Therefore, if you have reached an agreement via mediation or through consent orders or parenting plan, then cross examination won’t be necessary.

If your matter is going to court and you need assistance, contact Hooper Mill Family Lawyers at Victoria Point on (07) 3207 7663; or Hooper Mill Family Lawyers Coolangatta on (07) 5599 3026.

 

 

, , ,

Trusts and Separation

Working with accountants – Family trusts and separation

“Family trusts” are a common structure through which people may operate a business or hold assets.

There are various reasons why people may choose to place assets within a trust structure, but how are these structures (and other trust structures) regarded in the event of separation, divorce and family law proceedings? Do they offer any protection from a claim by an ex-spouse with respect to assets held by the trust?  And what issues arise in the family law context?

What is a family trust?                          

A family trust is typically a discretionary trust generally set up by a family member with other family members being the beneficiaries of the trust.

Primarily family trusts are established to achieve tax minimisation in the manner by which trust income and capital is distributed to the beneficiaries; and to provide protection to the assets of the trust. Protection of assets occurs because the legal interest in the assets is held by the trustee for the benefit of the beneficiaries.

Thus, trust asset protection can be achieved as assets are kept separate from the claims of the creditors of any individual beneficiary.

But do trusts protect trust property from a spouse of a person who may be a beneficiary or trustee of a trust?

What is property in the family law context?                                 

For the purposes of the Family Law Act 1975 the term “property” has a very broad definition. The Full Court has said:

“The word “property” is the most comprehensive of all the terms which can be used, in as much as it is indicative and descriptive of every possible interest a party can have.”[i]

Property can be real or personal and has been held to encompass interests including shares in Pty Ltd companies, partnership interests, contractual rights, rights under trade licences, beneficial interests in administered estates and rights with respect to property held in trusts.

Therefore, in being called upon to determine whether trust assets ought to be regarded as property for family law purposes, Judges will take a broad approach to answering that question.

In determining whether the assets of a trust ought to be included as property of the parties available for distribution between them, Courts exercising jurisdiction pursuant to the Family Law Act 1975 will examine what “influence and control” a party may exert over the trust.

The types of factors that the Court will look for include:

  • What position or role within the trust do the parties have within the trust structure? (i.e. settlor, appointer, trustee and beneficiary)
  • What distributions have occurred in the past?
  • Are there debit or credit loans/accounts?
  • What benefits have the parties received in terms of payment of expenses or salaries etc?

The High Court has held that in a situation where neither the husband or wife is a beneficiary of the Trust, the assets of the trust can be available for the “matrimonial property pool” based on factors such as the assets having been built up by the contributions of the parties over a long period.[ii]

In Kelly and Kelly (No2) the husband had no interest in the trust however the Court determined control based on his relationship with those who had an interest and that he received indirect financial advances. In this case the directors of the corporate trustee were the husband’s accountant, brother and wife. The husband was not a settlor, appointer or beneficiary.

Where the Court does not consider that the assets of the trust ought to be treated as property of the parties (such as where a party has a beneficial interest in a discretionary trust), it may be still be relevant to consider whether the interest is a mere expectancy (and irrelevant) or a financial resource of a party leading to an adjustment of the percentages of the overall matrimonial property pool each party receives.[iii] This is a situation where the history of distributions will be important evidence in firstly determining whether there is a financial resource, and secondly the weight to be applied (i.e. the level of percentage adjustment).

Other issues for Gold Coast family law solicitors and accountants?

There are a number of practical issues that arise in terms of proving a party’s case with respect to the trust and its assets, and with respect to how property may be distributed from a trust to a party to the marriage.

 

Family Law Disclosure

To determine the question of control, determine what interests the parties hold, and/or gain an understanding of what assets the trust holds, documents and information will be required. Often these documents will be held by a party’s accountant, and it is not uncommon for a spouse to lack access to documents, information or an understanding as to how the family financial affairs are structured.

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Rules require parties make “full and frank” disclosure.[iv]

The types of documents family law solicitors will typically request from a party or their accountant are:

  • Tax returns with attached financials to determine what is the financial position of the trust;
  • Trust deeds (including deeds of variation) to determine the structure and issues of control;
  • For any corporate trustee a copy of the corporate constitution;
  • Bank statements and any credit card statements for trust accounts evidencing transactions;
  • Minutes of trustee meetings relevant to control and history of dealings;
  • Register of assets and/or register of distributions;
  • Loan agreements with respect to loan accounts;
  • If the trust is operating a business (as is commonly the case), disclosure of relevant business records to determine value, assets and financial dealings.

The above is not exhaustive, and disclosure will be required depending on the circumstances and relevance.

If a party refuses to disclose, it can impact negatively upon their case and cause the Court to draw adverse inferences in some situations.

Further, trustees have obligations under State and Territory legislation to maintain certain records which beneficiary have a right to inspect. Subpoenas are also an available remedy to compel a recalcitrant party (or a third party such as an accountant) to provide documents or give evidence.

Issues for family law settlements involving trusts and transfer of property from trusts to a spouse or former spouse

There are a number of issues that can arise in relation to transfer of trust assets and income at separation.

These types of issues include:

  • Capital Gains Tax (“CGT”) – where an asset pregnant with CGT is transferred from the trust to a spouse (or de facto spouse). In this situation the spouse takes the asset pregnant with the CGT however the transfer from trust to spouse attracts CGT rollover relief.[v]
  • Tax issues from settlement distributions – If as part of a family law settlement a distribution from a trust is contemplated, it will be important to determine whether the intended recipient is still a beneficiary. A spouse who was a beneficiary may no longer be a beneficiary as at the date of settlement. For example, if the parties are divorced and the former spouse doesn’t fit the definition of a class of beneficiary pursuant to the deed after the marriage is dissolved. This can create issues as to how the ATO will regard and tax the payment.
  • Tax issues from past distributions – If tax hasn’t been assessed on past financial years distributions, the tax needs to be considered in determining the overall pool available for distribution and whether the liable party will pay, or if the other party will be responsible for the tax. Sometimes it is an issue that tax on prior years distributions is payable, but that spouse party hasn’t received the distribution (income splitting between spouses). In this situation however, the beneficiary can enforce the actual payment of the distribution.
  • Division 7A Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 – In some circumstances where distributions have been made to a private company, but not paid (present unpaid entitlements or UPE), Div 7A tax may be payable.

It is important for family lawyers drafting orders to consider all the potential issues arising from the proposed transfers, and where applicable, ensure that clients obtain accounting advice before finalising property settlement orders.

Family law advice

If you have any queries in relation to separation, divorce, de facto relationships, property settlement or child support payments, my firm Hooper Mill Family Lawyers can assist you with practical advice.

We are family lawyers servicing all areas in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast.

[i] In the Marriage of Duff (1977) 29 FLR 46 – approving the statement by Lord Langdale MR in Jones v Skinner 5 LJ Ch. 87.
[ii] Kennon v Spry (2008) FLC 93-388 – in this case the trust was set up by an expert on the law of trusts likely for the purposes of placing assets beyond the reach of the wife.
[iii] Kelly and Kelly (No2) FLC 91-108.
[iv] Family Court Rules 2004 R13.04 and Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 R20.04.
[v] S 126-5 Income Tax Assessment Act 1997.

, , , , , , ,

Christmas, Parenting Orders and Family Law

It’s that time of year again and things can become a little tense as holiday, Christmas Day and New Year plans for separated families are negotiated or implemented.

Separation is never easy; and special occasions like Christmas can often be very difficult, highlighting the reality of the changed living arrangements post separation. This can be the case for parents who have “custody of children” as well as for the parents who have arrangements traditionally thought of as “access”, “contact” or “spends time and communicates”.

The important thing to remember in any post separation parenting situation is negotiations occur “in the shadow of the law”.

This means both disputing parents ought to consider how the law might apply to their circumstances when they are engaging in negotiations.

The law empowers judges to exercise “discretion” to make parenting orders, and the process by which this occurs is complex.

However, two very important propositions bear heavily in the mind of a judge being called upon to make a parenting order. These are:

  1. Children have rights; while parents have responsibilities;
  2. Parenting arrangements ought to be in the best interests of the children.

From a practical perspective the best thing for both parents to do is remain “child focused”. This means try to consider what arrangements will place the best interests of the children, ahead of their own interests or feelings.

In my experience as a Brisbane Family Lawyer, some of the things that may be relevant for you to think about, or ask yourself, in making parenting arrangements at Christmas:

  • Making Christmas time a happy childhood memory. One of the most important issues for children’s mental health is to not be exposed to disputes between their parents. Studies have shown witnessing family violence generates similar response in children as having violence directed towards them; and some writers argue “exposing a child to domestic violence is a form of abuse in itself, regardless of whether the child is the target of such violence or not.”
  • Would the children be excited to see both of their parents, grandparents and other people who are important to them on Christmas Day? Is splitting Christmas Day in half what the children would likely prefer? Or would they be happier not to travel on Christmas Day; instead spending Christmas with one parent one year, and with the other the next;
  • If one parent has issues affecting the children’s safety, such as drug or alcohol problems, is there someone trusted who might supervise the time?
  • Will you let them take some of the gifts to the other parents home? Sometimes an item can represent a connection to the home they are not in;
  • Can they give a gift to the other parent?
  • Have you made planned holiday activities and outings, and taken time off work etc.

These are adult issues and it’s not a good idea to question your children directly as to what they want. Hopefully you know your children well enough to have an instinctive knowledge of what parenting arrangements they would prefer.

One of the most child focused post separation steps you can take for your children is to be “business like” in your dealings with the other parent, even in difficult circumstances, or when Court proceedings have commenced.

If you are dealing with a difficult or litigious ex-partner in a parenting matter, conducting yourself in a manner consistent with the above will be important evidence that you are child focused.

Judges make Orders they think will promote children’s rights and best interests. In my experience it is usually very obvious to the Judge whether one party (or both) is not behaving in a child focused way. If it’s not obvious immediately, it will usually become obvious as the litigation proceeds.

If you need the assistance of the Court to spend time with your children at Christmas, remember this is traditionally a busy period, and it is a good idea to get advice as earlier in the year. Rule 5.01A Family Law Rules 2004 provides the application must be filed before 4.00 pm on the second Friday in November of the application year if it relates to Parenting Orders during the Christmas School holiday period.

Ref: Flood and Fergus 2008 referred to in Morgan A and Chadwick H (2009) “Key Issues in Domestic Violence” Australian Institute in Criminology, Summary Paper No 7, at 8.

 

HMFL Logo mono white

  • Building H, Shop 27, Victoria Point Lakeside
    7-27 Bunker Road, Victoria Point QLD 4165

Facebook Logo Primary       Instagram Glyph Gradient

Areas of Practice Menu

"*" indicates required fields

Name*

Copyright © 2024 Hooper & Mill Family Lawyers. All rights reserved. Website Designer