Photo of a gloomy young family with a sad little bou hugging a teddy bear, and his parents with depressed looks

Evidence knocked back in family law case due to best interests of the child

Jacob Smith ||

A recent decision of the Family Court serves as a reminder of the cornerstone of parenting cases: the best interests of the child. The case also confirms the ongoing duty of disclosure.

The case involved a contentious parenting dispute between a separated couple with three young children. The relationship between the parents was extremely acrimonious, exposing the children to a battlefield of sorts during changeover periods.

Prior to the final hearing, each party submitted their trial affidavits. To the father’s surprise, the mother’s affidavit had attached hours of digital recordings made of him during changeover. While the mother had those recordings for some time, she had not previously disclosed them to the father. The recordings had already been seen by the child expert before the father had an opportunity to voice his objection.

The Family Law Rules provide that each party has a duty to the Court and to the other party, to give a full and frank disclosure of all information relevant to the case, and sought to be relied upon, in a timely manner. Any failure to comply with this duty may result in the Court excluding the evidence that is not properly disclosed.

In circumstances where the mother had the recordings for some time, she ought to have provided them to the father prior to the filing of her final trial affidavit.

The father filed an urgent application asking the Court to exclude the recordings from the mother’s affidavit and sought an order for a new expert to be appointed and a new report.

The Judge excluded the recordings from the mother’s evidence. However, the Judge was not satisfied it was appropriate to appoint a new expert and ordered that the present expert complete the report for the final hearing but disregard the recordings.

In addition to the conduct of the mother, the Court had to balance and consider other factors. In broad summary, the Court found that:

· the mother failed in her obligations for disclosure;

· most of the recordings were either irrelevant or had little probative value;

· it was not in the children’s best interests to subject them to a new expert and more interviews; and,

· any concern of bias by the expert could be addressed by cross examination at the final hearing.

When it comes to disputes in parenting cases, there is no easy automatic response or outcome. It is much more complex and involves considering and balancing a myriad of factors. The overriding consideration is, of course, the best interests of the child. If you require assistance with your family court proceedings or case, please do not hesitate to contact a member of Coleman Greig’s Family Law team today, who would be more than happy to assist you.

Share:

Send an enquiry

Any personal information you provide is collected pursuant to our Privacy Policy.

Categories
Archives
Author

More posts

SafeWork NSW
SafeWork NSW releases new strategy to address psychosocial hazards

On 22 May 2024 SafeWork NSW introduced a new strategy to address psychological and psychosocial hazards. The SafeWork NSW Psychological Health and Safety Strategy 2024-2026 establishes new supports for employers regarding their duties in preventing psychosocial harm in the workplace.

roles in the strata scheme
Understanding roles in the strata scheme

A strata scheme is a building or group of buildings that have been divided into lots which can be apartments, villas, offices, units or townhouses. This will be articulated in the strata plan.

Airbnb home
Can I put my home on Airbnb?

Airbnb is a form of short-term rental accommodation. To add your property to Airbnb in NSW, you are required to meet several laws and regulations governing short-term rentals.

liquidators required to seek approval
When are liquidators required to seek approval to retain legal counsel?

When does a liquidator (or the company he or she is appointed to) need court, creditor, or committee approval to validly retain a solicitor to act in a liquidation matter which is likely to extend for longer than three months?  The answer to this question has only recently been settled.

Proposed changes to building
Proposed changes to building and construction law in NSW

The Building Bill 2022 (the Bill) is the key avenue through which the NSW Government has proposed to reshape the culture of the building and construction industry by eliminating poor performance and improving the quality of building statewide.

Dismiss an employee
Can you dismiss an employee who fails to return to the office?

Slowly but surely, most employers are requiring employees to return to the office for at least a portion of their working week. Some employers continue to struggle with employees resistant to returning to the office or those who have an expectation that they can continue to work from home whenever it suits them.

Phoenixing in Construction
New powers to combat phoenixing in construction

The rise of phoenixing in the building and construction industry in Australia in recent years has proved a significant challenge to regulators. Mismanagement of time or cashflow can quickly propel businesses into insolvency.

© 2024 Coleman Greig Lawyers  |  Sitemap  |  Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation. ABN 73 125 176 230