Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Pie in the Sky

I note at the link "Parenting Plans vs Orders" state  Parenting Plans are NOT registered with the Court and are NOT enforceable as Court Orders. I question this statement and seek you look at section(s.) 63DB of the Family Law Act (the Act) which I now produce.
"Registered parenting plans"
Application of section
(1)  This section applies to a registered parenting plan.

Saving of registered parenting plan
 (2)  A registered parenting plan continues in force until revoked in accordance with section 63E, or set aside, varied or discharged as referred to in section 63H.

No variation of registered parenting plan
(3)  A registered parenting plan cannot be varied.

Revocation of registered parenting plan
(4)  Subject to subsection
(5), a registered parenting plan may be revoked by agreement in writing between the parties to the plan.

Registration of revocation required
(5)  An agreement revoking a registered parenting plan:
(a)  may, subject to the applicable Rules of Court, be registered, in a court having jurisdiction under this Part, under section 63E; and
(b)  does not have effect to revoke the plan until it is so registered.

So YES Parenting Plans can be registered. I say do it now and make it enforcable to undo the harm she is causing by confusing your child by 1 day I have a father then I don't have a father, why?

Just because Lawyers don't like Promissory Estoppel does not mean it is not applicable for the enforcement of an agreement signed between 2 parties having a legal unity affording a right to 1 party by the other. In fact the signing of an agreement creates a contract and agreement whether the agreement be a right to interact with a child or cross a strip of land (CARNEIRO & ANOR v ROBINSON & ORS [2005] SADC 81). Both are agreements of a right to an action certifide by verbal or in Glyns' case, the signiture of the ex to the parenting plan signed by his ex.



Last edit: by Agog

Police can not enforce a FamCA Order or plan, they can only comply with the Orders of the plan and seek the parties do the same for the children's best interest. The best the police (state) can do is uphold the peace by seeking Orders or a registered plan is complied with.
It is the Court who's duty it is to uphold a reg plan and how they do that is to be tested. I have High Court (HC) actions seeking to, s.32 of the Judiciary Act, upheld reg plan and signed plan or Consent Orders not Court endorsed by the FamCA, in the HC.


The matter I have, if heard, should create Rules or recommend the creation of FamCA Rules consistent with the law of estoppel of agreement. Evidence presented for existing Orders before existing Orders/Decrease can be made or relied on, and Writs of Mandamus for the making of Orders or Leave. Prohibition for the prevention pursuant to Gibbs CJ of the HC in 1987 in Ex-parte Green at paragraph 10 and another Writ which goes hand in hand with prohibition to quash an Order made out of jurisdiction or for/by criminal intent.

Probably a bit deep for most, but hand in hand with the issues of this matter, each are all law not at this time pursued in the FamCA by lawyers probably due to more woman breach Orders and agreement made not made into Orders than men.


Mike T, a contravention or contempt requires a Court Order, read 112AP of the Act. The police are State not Federal so can only enforce the peace not a Federal Order. If the peace is pursuant to a Federal Order they are obliged to seek the Order is obeyed. There is no law causing State Police to cause the Order to be obeyed only law causing enforcement of the peace, which should be seen as compliance with the FamCA Order or Reg Parenting Plan hence my recommendation to Reg the Plan ASAP. Can I put it any more plan?

Case Law is made from the seeking of enforcement of Common Law on situations that read as applicable to the Common Law pertaining to the scenario presented. That is, what's the point SRL's of this site are not interested in advancing the people, only their own constrained thinking.



Last edit: by No-Justice

Just talked to the Mlb registry and was told to file a contravention of the Plan, no they don't reg Plans any more, could not say why. Told a copy of the Plan is attached to the affidavit of the Contravention(Contra) and reference made in the affidavit to the attached plan.

But when you look at the Law for contraventions I see what you mean the enforcement of a contra has not made it open to enforce Plans only primary Orders.

And yet if the contra were to reply on s63D of the Act for enforcement. That is there has been no written agreement to vary or revoke the existing Plan that has been followed for about 3 months with little or no hic-up. With an application for Orders on the basis the Ex has acted in Contra of the Plan without a written agreement to vary or revoke the Plan then the spirit and purpose of the Plan and the Law have been Contra'ed with no regard for the best interests of the child.

NOW I SEE why Promissory Estoppel is hated by Fam Lawyers. It would make enforcement of Plans and Consent Orders tooooooo easy thereby diminish their workload.  

NJ, forget Estopple. It is misleading and likely to confuse. Despite what you say, breach of a parenting plan, whether registered or not is not remedied by contravention proceedings. Plans are NOT enforceable.
Likewise you can not locate and recover a child based on a breach of terms of a Parenting plan because the location and recovery sections deal with children covered by parenting ORDERS.
Please be careful not to give misleading advice.
estoppel
From Old French estoupail: 'stopper' or 'bung.' Legal rule that one cannot make an allegation or denial of fact that is contrary to one's previous actions or words.

I'm not in the position to give misleading information simply requesting more information that may help obtain an answer towards what possibilities are open for glyn.

Thats why I stated this was only a personal perception when I read the posts.

It's still not clear as to possible ways of dealing with a decision changed at the twelfth hour, is it back to mediation or application to the court ???

Can you expand on your post T12 as to what may be an alternate.

Estoppel

Can we forget about Estoppel? NJ was talking about this some time back and it confuses people. It is mostly to do with contract law(offer,consideration  & acceptance). A parenting plan is NOT a contract in the legal sense. Fancy legal terms & arguments may impress first year law students but they really pizz off family law FMs and judges.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas. 
What is a Contract

The merriam-webster.com/dictionary defines contract as; coming from the Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin contractus, from contrahere to draw together, make a contract, reduce in size… and gives 4 main meanings of:

  1 a: a binding agreement between two or more persons or parties; especially : one legally enforceable.

  1b: a business arrangement for the supply of goods or services at a fixed price <make parts on contract.> "The most used, I say, to obscure 1a, 1c and 2. 4 may be wishful thinking to most but is a NO NO so get away from those thoughts. :lol: "

1c: the act of marriage or an agreement to marry "I say, or the result of a marriage on how the resulting contingency will be included in the first contract. (Children will be raised is a contingency of the first contract whether envisaged or not) I say. A first contract with no contingency (forethought for the unforeseen production of children) does not make that contract of unity (marriage) null envied, only adds to what should be a JOY to the marriage and a conformation of the unity at Law, Evidence of the Union, and Evidence of a contract to produce children with costs equally shared, not necessarily equal on $$$$ or interactive value."

2: a document describing the terms of a contract "I say like a Parenting Plan, that is an agreement/contract on how the children will be raised and interacted with each intermit family group, thereby creating an agreement of RIGHTS for each Family Group."

3: the final bid to win a specified number of tricks in bridge   :offtopic:

4: an order or arrangement for a hired assassin to kill someone <his enemies put out a contract on him> :offtopic: or is it  :lol:

I put it for the purposes of Fam Law, a Parenting Plan is within the purpose of a contract, that is, it is an agreement on how and who will spend time, money and what ever with the children to encourage them to grow to their fullest potential. For each of them to be productive members of the society they live in, rather than, be some of the homeless caused by their lack of identity with the society they live in or angry at the denial of a right (more often caused by woman then the Court) to interact with all their family members. This includes all family members of both sides of their immediate family members, not just the side chosen by the residential (live with) party."

A Contract of old, was done by a handshake and word of mouth, not today, today what is said means nothing tomorrow, WHY? Because the moral enforcement of an agreement made today has been watered down to proof of the agreement that was made yesterday. Proof of agreement to Parenting Plans yesterday have been watered down through lack of enforcement to mean nothing but appease the man today so you can do what ever you WANT tomorrow.

Estoppel is a Common Law of enforcement of an agreement (Parenting Plan) so is dependent on the Judge as to if enforcement of the Plan is in line with the wishes of the Judge, not the LAW of "Best Inertest of the Children" or s.63( c) of the Act but the thinking and wishes of the Judge.

why?

Forget estoppel for family law

For any one reading this and previous posts about estoppel you need to ask your self the following:



Why?

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

Pie in the Sky

Flying a Jumbo jet without even having a first flight in a Tiger Moth

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
Thanks heaps for the references to where posts are going Agog it makes it so much easier to keep up with whats being discussed and how it's related.

I have but a simple mind.

I do believe it was written that when the family court was inquired too it referenced that Parenting Plans were not recognized as a formal agreement. This would then suggest they are only a pensive agreement or trial period before making orders.

Here in the west parenting plans have had little to no value for some year before I even separated and by the sounds they have the same value elsewhere.    
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets