VIC Vexatious and litigious ex

[sammy01]

Ok, so case law is interesting. Definitely some cases have become important. Rice and Asplund springs to mind. But each case in family law is judged on its merits. pre

This might be interesting to you

How to run a family law case | Victoria Legal Aid

Information about how to prepare a family law case and represent yourself in court.

www.legalaid.vic.gov.au

This is a more complex version

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2019C00002

Have a read to keep you busy.

Home | Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia focuses on innovation and fair and efficient processes that centre on risk, responsiveness and resolution

www.familycourt.gov.au

Best interest of kids is paramount. Precedents are well down the picking order. The facts of the case, the expert witness, ICL all trump precedents.
I found this site:

Best Interests of the Child | Family and Divorce Lawyers

Best interests of the child. Find out what the best interests of the child are here , or call our Legal Advice Hotline 7am-midnight, 7 days on 1300 636 846.

www.gotocourt.com.au

.
Nice simple - primary and additional considerations that courts consider. Precedent isn't there.

Final though - mate when my ex was talking about moving away with the kids I lost days reading through relocation cases. After all that I was none the wiser about how my case would go IF the ex was to take it that far. I’d go one further, I was more confused than when I started.

I resigned myself to the fact that IF it came to her making and application, I would self represent for a bit to buy some time, test the waters and use some of the knowledge I’d built up over the years. BUT I'd decided that rather than risking it, I would agree to her moving under the condition that she agree to 50/50 care upon moving because I too would pack up and move. Fortunately, it didn't come to that and the fact that i told her that IF she saw this through court and got to move, I would be following probably contributed to her giving up.

Oops, sorry started to reminisce... My point is - other cases like Gorman and Gorman make for interesting reading (she was a nutter) but my understanding is only the cases that helped clearly define terms, like how Rice and Asplund defined the term 'significant change in circumstance' really matter.

 

[Dpj]

Thanks Sammy. I agree that each case before the court is different and the subjectivity of emotions and behaviours are so unique that common law, for child custody, would not be that relevant. The property settlement part would have more common law applied. Ill read the case you mentioned as i like to be learned and you've mention it a few times. Thanks for those links. I will use my lawyer heavily, i just am always that guy who likes to be as educated as i can about things as i do believe it will help me, at least in my own mind as i will feel more in control.

 

[Atticus]

My point is - other cases like Gorman and Gorman make for interesting reading (she was a nutter) but my understanding is only the cases that helped clearly define terms, like how Rice and Asplund defined the term 'significant change in circumstance' really matter.

So true.

 

[sammy01]

i just am always that guy who likes to be as educated as i can about things as i do believe it will help me, at least in my own mind as i will feel more in control.

Yup I get that. I reckon that is why I'm still here. I learned all this crap when I was where you are. Might as well put it to some good use now I've moved on. Kinda good therapy to know what knowledge / experience i have might save some other punter a few quid and a few sleepless nights

 

[Dpj]

Mate. I cant thank this thread enough. More so on an emotional level. Ive told some of my mates about the s**t jock throw incident and we'd all nominate you for an Australia Order Medal (AOM) for having that inner strength to only say 'thanks'. I think of that everytime i cop another threat or abusive text.. so im thinking of you every day sammy Hahaha

 

[sammy01]

You can tell your mates this one...
HER: You've got a small d*ck darling.
Me: Nope. You're just a huge C****.
My mates like that story.
Any chance you live anywhere near Shepparton? gonna be over that way in about 12 weeks if Covid doesn't stuff up my plans.

 

[Dpj]

I dont. But id drive up there to shout you lunch and have a yarn. Pm me

 

[sammy01]

so where are you up to? any movement on getting consent orders?

 

[Dpj]

Nah. She pulled it all. I put something to her yesterday. I budged more on the kids in her favour. I want to avoid the family report as i spoke to the BPD foundstion yesterday and understand with un interviewable kids it may not be effective. So it might just be a waste of money. I also read up on Rice and Asplund.

I gave her a better kid deal with these conditions:

A. Both of us getting a psych assessment. We can appoint 3 psychs (psychologist or phychiatrist) for the other person to choose from. How many sessions we have can be negotiated or can be based on the psychiatrists saying i need X sessions. i) If neither of us are considered to have a disoder The custody orders in 2 stay. ii) If one of us does have a personality disorder
ii.a) then we get a family report done prior to final hearing (May 1st 2021).
ii.b) Treatment must be done as recommended by the assessing psych ii.c) the final custody agreement will remain in place until the results of the family report.
ii.d) The outcome of the psych reports to be provided to the family report assessor.

Ps: im not great on the order of things. If i get her to agree on kids, couldnt we make that final?

 

[sammy01]

mate if you can get consent orders and avoid all of the above then do it.

I do get where you're coming from as far as mental health goes. If it was any other mental health condition, depression, for example then I'd agree with you. BUT BPD is something else. Hard to diagnose and almost impossible to treat and ultimately a scenario like Gorman and Gorman only comes after years of litigation. Absolutely worst case scenario is SHE pulls the wool over the eyes of the shrink and you wind up being assessed as the unhinged one. Frankly, mate, you're entitled to be a little unhinged. Living with a nutter will do that.