Event and Time
Event Description
The case involves an application made by Ms. Fishwick to revisit family law orders that have been in place for a decade pertaining to her son, X, who is currently 14 years old. The request was to change the parental responsibility arrangements, which allocated responsibilities to the paternal grandparents and the Department of Communities and Justice.
Application and Claims
- Applicant: Ms. Fishwick (mother of X).
- Amended Initiating Application: Filed on 28 February 2022 to revisit prior orders from 2012, seeking a modification of parental authority and residence decisions for X.
- Opposition: The application was opposed by Mr. Bradwell (father who did not participate in the proceedings), his parents (paternal grandparents), and the Secretary of the Department of Communities and Justice.
- Context: The original orders were established due to circumstances deemed significant, leading to their current enforcement. The application sought to amend these based on alleged new circumstances.
Judicial Decisions
- The Amended Initiating Application was withdrawn by the Applicant and subsequently dismissed.
- No costs were ordered against any party involved.
- The case was removed from the list of matters awaiting finalisation, and all future listing dates were vacated.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Applicant's Claims: Ms. Fishwick aimed to modify the existing orders, asserting that there may have been changes in circumstances warranting a review of the custodial arrangements concerning her child.
- Arguments by Grandparents: The paternal grandparents maintained the status quo, opposing any changes to the existing custodial provisions, likely emphasizing stability for X.
- Department's Position: The Secretary sought preliminary determination whether the matter warranted a full hearing, invoking principles established in the case of Rice & Asplund, which involve a need for clear and significant changes in circumstance before a family law order can be revisited.