Case Study : Sargent & Selwyn : The Mother of all Family Law cases, Epic case of two obsessive intelligent parents.

Sargent & Selwyn (No.3) [2018] FCCA 2836 (4 October 2018).

The was a Final #parenting hearing to decide whether or not the parties should have equal shared parental responsibility.
Summary
The primary issue was the communication between the parties, with neither party prepared to give an inch and every little molehill becoming a mountain of communication to reach any sort of resolution created a situation where shared parental responsibility was unworkable.

The Court was also asked to consider whether or not there should be an equal time arrangements, however that presumption was rebutted.
Other aspects of the final hearing covered practice and procedure, interlocutory applications, s.67ZBA application and an application to transfer to Family Court and application for costs certificate.
Issues 
The key issues in this case centre on the parties’ communication and their rigidity of approach and whether or not these difficulties are such that the mother should exercise sole parental responsibility and the father’s time during school terms should be reduced. The father seeks an order that the parties continue to exercise equal shared parental responsibility. The mother seeks sole parental responsibility for Thomas. The ICL supports the mother’s position.
The father seeks that from 2019 he have equal time with during school terms as well as during school holidays.

The mother seeks that the father’s time be reduced to two nights a fortnight during school terms and that the holidays be shared equally. In her written submissions she modified her position to the father spending time with [X] three nights a fortnight from Friday after school to before school on Monday on alternate weekends.
EPIC

The father’s trial affidavit is in four volumes. The annexures total 889 pages. They include several email exchanges and diary notes covering various topics dating back to 2012. The annexures also include extracts of transcripts from various court appearances in these proceedings and social science articles.
These diary notes and the level of detail the father goes into gives insight into the father’s obsessiveness.
The mother filed a case outline on 4 April 2018 totalling 47 pages. She filed an amended case outline on 23 April 2018 totalling 56 pages. The material she prepared also shows some obsessiveness by her.

The copious amounts of material filed by the parties does not assist the Court in determining the issues in dispute. It is most unfortunate that both parties focused much of their material making complaints about the other party and on historical issues and issues that have no bearing on the current issues in dispute before the court.
The mother agreed that during the procedural hearing before Judge Henderson, her Honour asked the mother “... Is there any issue that [X]’s father is anything but a competent, capable, caring parent from your point of view?” The mother replied “not that I’m aware of your Honour.”
I emphasise that that I am making the order for sole parental responsibility because it is not in [X]’s best interests for the parents to continue to share it. It is not about rewarding the mother and punishing the father. It is simply unworkable for them to continue to share equal parental responsibility.
The problem with the parties’ communication is not captured by the dictionary definition the father refers to. This is a case where there is too much communication between the parties which is not only counterproductive but just adds to the conflict between the parties.
Held
The mother have sole parental responsibility for the child [X] (“the child”) born 2012.

That the child live with the mother.

Commencing the first week of Term 4 2018, that the father spend time with the child during school terms during the first week of each fortnight from after school Thursday to before school Monday of week two (or Tuesday if the Monday is a public holiday).