Event and Time
Event Description
- Date: Parenting orders were made on 27 March 2019.
- Parties Involved: Mr. Garrety (Appellant), Ms. Steyn (Respondent), and their children B (born 2009) and C (born 2011).
- Background: The appellant previously had sole parental responsibility for the children under orders from December 2014, which were not functioning effectively.
Application and Claims
- Appellant’s Claims:
- Sought to maintain sole parental responsibility and for the children to live with him. - Asserted that restrictions were necessary on the respondent's care of the children.
- Respondent’s Claims:
- Sought reversal of previous parenting orders to gain sole parental responsibility for the children. - Argued against the unsupervised care of the children by the appellant's wife.
Judicial Decisions
- The appeal was allowed in part, resulting in a variation of specific orders regarding the residency of the children.
- The primary appeal was dismissed, and costs were ordered against the appellant, including fixed costs to the respondent and the Independent Children's Lawyer.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Appellant’s Arguments:
- Claimed the primary judge failed to adequately consider the expert recommendations (from Dr. EE) regarding the conditions of change in residence. - Argued both parties were equally culpable in the children's poor parenting.
- Respondent’s Arguments:
- Contended that the changes in parenting orders were necessary for the children’s well-being. - Supported the view that the respondent was less culpable than the appellant and his spouse, referencing Dr. EE's findings.