Cases published December 2015

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Family Court of Australia
Blaze & Anor & Grady & Anor [2015] FamCA 1064 ‐ 30 Nov 2015
Parenting – where the applicants are not the child’s “parents” – where the applicants are
not related to the child – where the mother and the applicants agreed before the child’s
birth that the applicants would care for the child–‐ quasi‐adoption – where the father was
not involved in this decision – where the mother resiled from that agreement – where the
mother, the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer seek orders to have the child
transitioned to the mother’s primary care – whether the child’s best interests are served by
continuing her established attachments to the applicants – whether the child’s best
interests are served by enhancing her familial attachments and familial connectedness to
her parents and siblings – where the child is two years old – principles relating to nonparent
applicants – child to live with her mother and spend time with the applicants and
spend time with her father.

Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Bannan & Taft & Anor [2015] FCCA 3167 ‐ 2 December 2015
Parenting – children aged 12, 10 and 8 who have been living with their maternal
grandmother since 2011 – where the mother and father are both long term illicit drug users
– where the mother is currently in jail awaiting trial on armed robbery charges – where the
father underwent nine months of residential rehabilitation in 2014‐2015 but was revealed
on the last day of the hearing to be still using methamphetamines, amphetamines and
cannabis – where the maternal grandmother originally sought orders that the children
spend supervised time with the father on four occasions each year but after the last drug
test result sought a no time order – where the father originally sought unsupervised time
but after the last drug test result sought a continuation of supervised time each alternate
week and unsupervised time if he did not return a positive drug test result for six months –
no benefit perceived in continuing supervised time when the court can have no confidence
that the father is likely to remain clean – orders made as proposed by maternal
grandmother.

1 www.austlii.edu.au[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]