VIC Family Court - When is an Application Considered Filed?

[Rod]

it's a court decision and not a child protection decision, however that simply is not the case.

Noooo, so not true. You will not win trying to argue child protection overrules a court.

 

[Malissla]

^^ This is a problem and may be the source of some of the issues. Child protection rank lower than a court, the court knows this and if you attempt to undermine the court's authority you will get put back in your box nearly every single time. Nothing overrides court orders except higher/appeal court orders. Even the Federal Parliament has to accept valid court orders.



You do have a choice. And Child protection is just one body a court may listen to.

I am not arguing in anyway whether you have a legitimate cause of concern for your children's' safety, just saying how a court will view you telling the court that you are going to follow what Child Protection tell you regardless of what the court says. I sense that you'd be stepping close to contempt of court if you wilfully disobey court orders.

I read the link you provided. Did you read this from the page: An initial grace period of three months (until 1 June 2018) was allowed in relation to compliance with the new forms.

re: Nonfiction's post: Even then Child protection are just another party to the case and have no authority over a judge..

I accept that Child Protection have no authority over a judge but on the other hand their position is that if the judge makes orders that allow for unsupervised access they will immediately seek orders in the children's court to prevent that happening - as they previously have done. You said that "Nothing overrides court orders except higher/appeal court orders." But Children's Court Orders do and HAVE overridden Federal Court Orders. - Well, in my case they have. It doesn't matter if I have a legitimate cause for concern for the children's safety, what matters is that Child Protection do, they obtained orders for three years that access must be supervised, after three years they sent me back to the federal court to change orders that allowed for unsupervised, I did not do so because I wanted to but at the behest of child protection. I have not disobeyed court orders. Yes, I did read it , it means you can still use the old forms up until June 1 2018. When federal court orders allowed for unsupervised access, child protection said no, those orders place the children at risk, they got orders in the childrens court to stop that, they tell me that if I do anything to place the children at risk from the father - unsupervised access - they will place them into care, I have no option than to do what child protection want. child protection can take the children, the court can as well- they can give them to the farther BUT child protection will not allow that, they would bring them back to me after getting new orders in the children's court.

 

[Rod]

This is the first time you mentioned you have orders from another court. Was the Childrens court of Victoria given full details of the Family Court matter? Did your ex contest the matter? Are they final orders or interim only?

I'm checking to see if the Childrens Court have authority to override family court/FCC orders. They may not, hence why you need to back to the Family/FCC court for a variation.

 

[Malissla]

This is the first time you mentioned you have orders from another court. Was the Childrens court of Victoria given full details of the Family Court matter? Did your ex contest the matter? Are they final orders or interim only?

Final Orders issued in the Federal Court allowed for unsupervised access, Child Protection said no and went to the Children's Court and obtained orders that said access must be supervised, access was supervised by child protection for three years, at which point they sent me back to the federal court to get the final orders that allowed for unsupervised access changed to supervised.

 

[Rod]

Which makes me think the Children's court cannot overrule the FCC orders. I amended my previous post a little bit.

By digging in and arguing a technical point about submission dates rather than redoing the application makes me think you are only hurting your own case showing you are inflexible. Again, not saying you are, but how you may be perceived.

OK, If the matter was heard by a magistrate sitting in the Children's court there is an argument the orders can have an affect on FCC/Family Court orders. However if no magistrate heard the matter then the orders from the Children's Court are no more than evidence to be used in the FCC/Family Court, which the FCC/Family Court judge can dismiss.

 

[Malissla]

Rod, in the event that the federal or family court issue orders that allow for unsupervised access child protection obtain orders in the children's court that access must be supervised, now I do not know if you consider that overriding Family Court Orders but that what happened previously albeit a Federal Court Order. I am somewhat frustrated because I am only at the family court at the behest of child protection - it is they who want the orders that access be supervised and I am kind of - FOUR YEARS LATER - at the point where I don't care what orders the family court make because child protection have on numerous occasions told me not to worry, they tell me the court has laws and rules to go by and that the court cannot place the children at risk and in the event the court makes orders that do then I don't need to worry because as they informed me - if the court does make orders that put the children at risk, ring us on the way out of court and we will immediately stop those orders taking effect. What possible difference can my attitude towards the court make in view of the situation.

 

[Malissla]

Which makes me think the Children's court cannot overrule the FCC orders. I amended my previous post a little bit.

By digging in and arguing a technical point about submission dates rather than redoing the application makes me think you are only hurting your own case showing you are inflexible. Again, not saying you are, but how you may be perceived.

OK, If the matter was heard by a magistrate sitting in the Children's court there is an argument the orders can have an affect on FCC/Family Court orders. However if no magistrate heard the matter then the orders from the Children's Court are no more than evidence to be used in the FCC/Family Court, which the FCC/Family Court judge can dismiss.

It was heard in the Children's Court by a magistrate Rod, over the course of three years consecutive supervision orders where issued that required access to be supervised.

 

[Rod]

Sighes.

in the event the court makes orders that do then I don't need to worry because as they informed me - if the court does make orders that put the children at risk, ring us on the way out of court and we will immediately stop those orders taking effect

Its a wonder these people don't lose their job saying things like that.

 

[Malissla]

Sighes.



Its a wonder these people don't lose their job saying things like that.

Well, consider this, if a man puts a shotgun to the heads of his partner and children and threatens to blow their heads off and child protection are aware of that and consider him to be an unacceptable risk and they have previously gone to the children's court and obtained orders to stop access where access was granted by a federal court perhaps rather than losing their job they should be praised for doing a great job of protecting children who are at risk of significant harm.

 

[Rod]

Then police should have been involved, partner charged with threats to kill and a FVIO taken out and then there'd be no dispute. Children's court is limited in what they can do so I am unclear why the matter was taken there.

Makes me think more is happening here or Child protection have stuffed up.