Conner & Conner (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 505 (24 July 2025)

(a) The place where the accident occurred;

(b) The registration of the vehicle the mother was driving at the time of the accident;

(c) The registration of any other vehicle involved in the accident; and

(d) Any injuries (if any) suffered by the mother as a result of the accident.

1. By no later that 5:00pm on 30 July 2025 the mother shall file and serve written submissions in relation to her Applications in a Proceeding filed 9 July 2025 and 23 July 2025 (apart from the adjournment Application).
2. By no later than 5:00pm on 4 August 2025 the father and the Independent Children's Lawyer shall file and serve written submissions in relation to the mother's Applications in a Proceeding filed 9 July 2025 and 23 July 2025 (apart from the adjournment Application).
3. The written submissions referred to in Orders 5 and 6 herein shall be no more than 15 pages in length (in total in respect of both Applications).
4. Leave be granted to the parties and the Independent Children's Lawyer to inspect and copy the material produced under subpoena to Queensland Police Service issued 14 May 2025 (ID:20).
5. The mother shall attend for an interview on 6 August 2025 (as directed by the Independent Children's Lawyer) with the psychiatric report writer (Dr C) and participate fully as requested by the psychiatric report writer.
6. Dr C of D Health Service is permitted to use any psychologist she chooses to assist her in the preparation of the psychiatric report of the parties and such psychologist is permitted to assist with carrying out psychometric testing of the parties (including psychometric testing of the mother).
7. In the event that the mother does not comply with Order 9 herein the Court shall consider proceeding with the matter on an undefended basis.
8. Upon receipt of the psychiatric report by Dr C in relation to the mother and the father the Court will consider whether an updated Family Report is required (and the Court will hear from the Independent Children's Lawyer and the parties in the relation to the need for an updated Family Report).
9. The mother has leave to issue a subpoena to Ms P.
10. The Independent Children's Lawyer has leave to issue subpoenas directed to:

(a) The Queensland Police Service; and

(b) The Department of Families, Seniors, Disability Services and Child Safety (Qld).

1. Upon the giving of 5 days' notice to the Court and the parties, the Independent Children's Lawyer has liberty to apply to relist the matter.

1. The mother was assisted by an interpreter at today's hearing.
2. On 24 July 2025 the mother again appeared to express reluctance to attend for an independent psychiatric review.

1. On 24 July 2025 the mother requested (in writing) that the Court provide written reasons for the decision made today.

1. An interpreter has been arranged to assist the mother at the independent psychiatric review.
2. The date for the provision of written submissions by the Independent Children's Lawyer and the father has been brought forward by the Court.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court's records.

Note: This copy of the Court's Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

1. On 9 July 2025 the mother filed an Application in a Proceeding seeking, inter alia, an adjournment of the final hearing scheduled to start on 4 August 2025.
2. On 24 July 2025 the Court commenced to hear submissions in relation to the mother's Application in a Proceeding filed 9 July 2025. The mother told the court that she was unable to attend personally in Court on 24 July 2025 because she had been involved in a motor vehicle accident that morning on her way to Court. The Court has ordered that the mother provide an affidavit setting out the circumstances of that motor vehicle accident.
3. The Reasons for Judgment relating to the Orders made on 24 July 2025 can be substantially discerned from the transcript of that day - but the Reasons have been reduced to writing at the specific written request of the mother. Because English is the mother's second language the Court has finalised the Reasons in writing and explained the Reasons in writing in a more fulsome way to assist the mother (in particular) to understand the Reasons for the Orders made on 24 July 2025.
4. The Court organised an interpreter and the interpreter became available via the Microsoft Teams link. So the Court had the mother by way of Microsoft Teams link and the interpreter by way of Microsoft Teams link. Counsel for the father attended in the Courtroom (Ms McLennan of Counsel) with her instructing solicitor and the father. The Independent Children's Lawyer (Ms Hawdon) also attended in the Courtroom.
5. At one stage during the hearing the mother left the Microsoft Teams link. It seemed to be the case that the link dropped out. This has occurred previously when the mother has appeared via Microsoft Teams. It does cause great disruption to the Court and to the proper conduct of the proceeding before the Court.
6. Again on 24 July 2025 the Court found it difficult to follow the mother's arguments, and that difficulty was magnified by the fact that the mother was on video link and the interpreter was on a separate video link and the mother's internet was not 100% reliable. Accordingly the Court directed that the mother's Application in a Proceeding filed 9 July 2025 and the mother's further Application in a Proceeding filed 23 July 2025 would be determined after the receipt of written submissions from the parties and the Independent Children's Lawyer. Those Orders relate to all aspects to the Applications in a Proceeding filed 9 July 2025 and 23 July 2025 - except the Application for the adjournment of the trial which was determined on 24 July 2025.
7. The father opposed the adjournment Application. The Independent Children's Lawyer made submissions in favour of adjourning the final hearing. The primary reason put forward by the Independent Children's Lawyer related to the fact that, at this point in time, there has been no independent psychiatric review of the mother.
8. On 20 May 2025 the Court ordered that both parents attend for independent psychiatric examinations. The father attended for a psychiatric review with Dr C as directed and organised by the Independent Children's Lawyer (in accordance with the Order made on 20 May 2025).
9. A date was organised for the mother's psychiatric attendance upon Dr C but that date clashed with a Court date before a Judicial Registrar relating to subpoenas. Accordingly, the Independent Children's Lawyer organised another date for the mother's independent psychiatric review. That date was July 2025. The mother refused to attend. The mother gave some reasons for her non-attendance during the Court hearing on 24 July 2025. I did not consider there was any merit in the mother's submissions concerning that issue.
10. I am aware that the mother has sought (in paragraph 2 of her Application in a Proceeding filed 9 July 2025) an injunction against any further psychiatric assessment pending the determination of an appeal filed 12 June 2025. As to the determination of the Application for an injunction, that will await the receipt by this Court of the written submissions outlined in Orders 5 and 6 of the Orders made on 24 July 2025.
11. In the meantime and in order to ensure that the matter can be further prepared for trial - orders were made on 24 July 2025 for the independent psychiatric review of the mother. In the event that the mother is successful in her Application for an injunction against further psychiatric assessment - then the Court will discharge the operation of Orders 9, 10 and 11 made on 24 July 2025.
12. By reason of the mother's non-attendance at the independent psychiatric review in July 2025 and by reason of the mother's continued stated reluctance to attend for independent psychiatric review - the Court made Order 11 (in relation to the possibility of the matter proceeding on an undefended basis) and explained to the mother the effect of an order that the matter proceed on an undefended basis - if that does occur.
13. The Court has also made an Order that Dr C can use whatever psychologist she thinks she needs for psychometric testing. There is no merit in the submissions put forward by the mother concerning the psychologist (i.e. the assistant to the psychiatrist). It is a regular occurrence. As the Court made clear during the hearing on 24 July 2025 - this would be the last opportunity for the mother to get an independent psychiatric assessment. The Independent Children's Lawyer confirmed that an interpreter will be available to the mother to assist her at the interview with the psychiatrist (and any psychologist as directed by Dr C).
14. Once the psychiatric reports have been finalised - the Independent Children's Lawyer will inform the Court as to whether or not she considers that an updated Family Report will be required. The parties will also be heard on that matter at the appropriate time.
15. The Court has, on an earlier date made an Order under section 102NA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The date of that Order is 11 November 2024. At the hearing on 24 July 2025 the Court encouraged the mother to organise a lawyer. The mother told the Court that she did have a lawyer at one stage - but, as a result of a complaint made by the mother about that lawyer, the mother asserts that the lawyer is under investigation by Legal Aid (and if I understood the mother correctly, by the Legal Services Commission). I have no knowledge whatsoever as to whether or not there is any substance to the misconduct complaint. It is not a matter for this Court to consider.
16. As noted, given the view of the Independent Children's Lawyer in relation to the state of preparedness for the trial, the trial will have to be vacated and the Final Hearing will be adjourned to a date to be fixed.
17. It was made abundantly clear to the parties (both the mother and the father) that the interim parenting orders must be complied with. The Independent Children's Lawyer continues to have liberty to apply.
18. The Court made certain other Orders in relation to the issuing of subpoenas. In the event that there are any future disagreements between the parties and the Independent Children's Lawyer concerning the issuing of subpoenas (or any aspect of the matter relating to subpoenas) - the same shall be referred to a Judicial Registrar for determination.

I certify that the preceding eighteen (18) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Howard.