Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

mmmmmmmmm - same case LOL

Just too many similarities. and all that matters is the outcome.:lol:

For me - Shared Parenting is a Reality - Maybe it can be for you too!
I think that the nature of the case also matters.

Clearly some of the evidence was, shall we say inaccurate? what if any will be the comments about this.

The Judicial Officer in question quite clearly thought she was above the law or that sections of the Law could be liberally applied to her. The case covers both the civil aspects of Family Law and the criminal aspects of AVOs

These raise the issue of double standards. Let us not forget this magistrate also issues AVOs in local Courts

It again raises the question of Section 121, about identification of parties. Is Section 121 actually a help or hindrance. For all the so called virtue or otherwise reporting restrictions should have been lifted?

I wonder if the site moderators may wish to start a separate area for this discussion as quite clearly there is more than the issue of a property case involved


Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
The original topic has been moved to a restricted area of the site - because of Section 121 considerations.

Note that although the parties were not identified by the Family Court -the nature of the high profile case meant that it was possible to identify the names of the parties.

This raises the contradictory nature of Section 121 - the Court can all but name the parties - but identifying them is an offence




Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets