FAMILY LAW ─ APPEAL ─ CONTRAVENTION ─ Interpretation of orders ─ Asserted uncertainty of drug screen orders ─ Whether there was such uncertainty as to their effect that the drug screen orders were not capable of founding a successful contravention application ─ Where the Court could not discern, on balance, which of the drug screen orders was intended to prevail ─ Where on balance, the Court was not persuaded that the inter-action of the drug screen orders was sufficiently clear as to permit them to found a successful application even on the civil standard of proof ─ Where given the uncertainty in relation to the operation of the drug screen orders the appellant’s defence could not be rejected ─ Appeal allowed in part ─ Contravention findings set aside.
FAMILY LAW ─ APPEAL ─ CONTRAVENTION ─ Waiver ─ Whether the Federal Magistrate erred because his Honour did not accept that the respondent’s failure to comply with the drug screen order/s provided a reasonable excuse for the appellant failing to comply with the orders for the parties’ child to spend time with the respondent, essentially on the basis that, by subsequently allowing contact, the appellant had waived the breach of the orders because she continued for months to comply with the orders ─ Where the logic of his Honour’s reasons for rejecting the defence is unassailable in the absence of evidence from the appellant that she believed that she had no choice than to comply with the orders, despite the respondent’s alleged breach ─ Challenge unsuccessful.
FAMILY LAW ─ APPEAL ─ CONTRAVENTION ─ Where there was no error with respect to jurisdiction or power on the part of the Federal Magistrate ─ Not established that his Honour did not afford the parties procedural fairness and natural justice ─ Challenges unsuccessful.
FAMILY LAW ─ APPEAL ─ CONTRAVENTION ─ Challenge to orders for compensatory time to be spent ─ Whether the Federal Magistrate failed to follow a legislative pathway, or to find jurisdictional facts in relation to compensatory contact ─ Where there may be cases where an application for compensatory time clearly obliges a judicial officer to consider the provisions of s 60CC from equal shared parental responsibility through ss 60CC and 65DAA, but the Court did not find, either as a matter of statutory construction, or on the facts, that the Federal Magistrate erred by failing to do so in this case ─ Where the Court did not find merit in any of the challenges to the variation or compensatory time orders made by the Federal Magistrate.
NOTE: The period for seeking special leave to appeal to the High Court has not expired.