Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

In court this week

A case progressing through the court system currently

I am currently sitting in court this week. A 4 day children and propert trial in the FCoA. We had expect it might be some what formal because of the property issues. In reallity the Judge is being extremely supportive and fair to the SRL I sit beside. The SRL also has some language issue as English is his second language, not huge issues, just does not grasp the concept of posing questions effectively. The Judge has been quite willing to take over the questioning where he saw the need. I also have to say, the Judge has not missed the mark once.

I will report more after it is over.


For me - Shared Parenting is a Reality - Maybe it can be for you too!
To ORR, I have not been involved in a 12A but I have spoken to several people that were following our basic direction of going and watching the way cases are run. In one particular instance the SRL had no idea at first he had 'wandered' into a 12A hearing. His comments were that it was amazing. Extremely informal and although counsel were present - effectively they were reduced to highly paid observers. The judge was talking to the parties (and he used the word talking - not addressing) as though they were the only people in the Courtroom. This seems to be the way these hearings were intended to run. Technically much of it still seems to be in the realm of 'discretion' as to whether cross examination is allowed. We need more first hand information of these hearings, on paper they are an SRLs 'dream' effectively the playing field is more level if counsels role is dramatically reduced.

The Oneadadc case is a property and childrens issue - so its not even a 12A, but what he is pointing to is the extremely fair attitude of the Judge -perhaps this is a sign of things to come?

I wonder? reasonable SRL? McKenzie Friend support? Reasonable Judge? Barrister on the other side = a better balanced hearing?

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 

Oneadad in court

Have to say the Judge was very fair. He intervened when necessary to "interpret" the SRL's questions, did a great job, got the answer the SRL wanted (and the Judge wanted). Mum was told at the end of day 3 of 4 day trial "I am going to give Dad at least 6 out of 14, as interim if I need to. Your choice if you want to continue as it will need another 4 days later in the year and I will still order at least 6.

To make it even more interest, the SRL has English as his second language.

It was a good day.

For me - Shared Parenting is a Reality - Maybe it can be for you too!
This is quite encouraging for SRL's. Are you able to advise who the Judge is in this matter? Good judges should be recognised  :rockon:

Site Director
The good thing is that Oneadadc can identify the judge and the legal people. Section 121 guidelines only prohibit identifying the parties, their locations, the children and any witnessess's. So with a few name changes of the parties he can effectively create an abridged version - same as an Austlii.

Better still since Austlii abbreviations are very 'dry' - we can also get  the 'feel' and 'perceptions' from an objective third party.

Unfortunately the report writer cannot be identified - however we have the facility in the closed sections - which are not 'published' but rather individual communications - to do so.

I would also 'wonder' (TIC) whether the AG would even pursue a '121' if the parties were slightly identified? If the outcome shows that the Amendments are working very well - and the Court is acting on them - would Bryant or the AG - do much to whoever brought this to public attention?

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 

A day of mourning

A day of mourning. Sadly after spending hours chatting quietly and civily, despite previous claims of FEAR, and getting so close to settling, one party (not mine) allowed greed to rule the day. I quote that party solicitor "they are going to learn a lesson they should have lerned long ago". We are going back to finish later in the year, another 4 days depite the judge saying "I have heard from almost everybody, and there are no real issues that I can see. This should never have been in court. There is only one party left to be heard and somebody may be lying".

Because we still have to go back, the judge said - Well we have to come back for 4 days, we have party 2 and their solicitor and council and we have party 1,  self represented, who will hopefully bring their McKenzies friend. We have had a large affidavit served on the self represented litigant less than 1 business day before trial, and they did not complain."  I am unwilling to identify the Judge. 

More later


For me - Shared Parenting is a Reality - Maybe it can be for you too!
oneadadc said
….greed to rule the day. I quote that party solicitor "they are going to learn a lesson they should have lerned long ago". We are going back to finish later in the year, another 4 days depite the judge saying "I have heard from almost everybody, and there are no real issues that I can see. This should never have been in court. There is only one party left to be heard and somebody may be lying".
The Council is getting sick and tired of these charlatans of the dark side who completely disregard the spirit, the letter and the intent of the new Act in which they are working under.

There is a clear explanatory memorandum that has gone out with the Family Law Act… The Solicitors and Barristers better start reading it because if there is continued poor performance in teh courts then the Shared Parenting Council will go back for yet another round of legislation reform.

In the last round we left the door open for the Judiciary to have some continued flexibility. If the orders are not forthcoming in a timely manner that give rise to early settlements with significant and substantial contact arrangements then we will be back for more regimented and constraints.

I am very disappointed to hear how the last day wrapped up. We can discuss further activities off line or in your executive forum.

I am tempted to get to letter writing to the law firm involved outlining the spirit and intent of the new laws…pointing out that this is about getting matters settled in a timely manner and getting the children settled into a proper regime of substantial contact for a wonderful dad who misses his kids…but knowing how delicate things are at this stage perhaps not a proper activity at this time.

We need a wall of shame to name, feather and tar these demonic solicitors who clearly have no interest in children's interests, but have a money sucking mentality.

The only loosers are the kids again and again and again…  :'(

Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets