The Family Court of Australia has overturned a decision of a Federal Circuit Court judge who issued an injunction stopping a mother from breastfeeding her child after she had decided to get a tattoo.

In what I can only describe as a controversial decision, a Federal Circuit Court judge sided with the father in what the media reports have described as a bitterly contested parenting dispute.  The father had made an application to stop the mother breastfeeding the child.

Judge Matthew Myers, a Federal Circuit Court judge who sits in Newcastle, determined that the child’s mother, by breastfeeding the child, posed some type of unacceptable risk to the child. This was based on his Honour’s view that despite the mother having tested negative to HIV and hepatitis, the test results were “not conclusive”.

The mother appealed the decision and the appeal was fast tracked. The full bench (3 judges) of the Family Court of Australian in Sydney heard the appeal on Friday, 19 June 2015. The appeal was fast tracked given the importance of the issue.

The Full Court determined that Judge Myers had made an error and lifted the injunction. It appears that Judge Myer may have based his view on his own research, most likely using Google, and having read articles from the Internet including from the Hepatitis Association and the Australian Breastfeeding Association.

The Full Court was critical of the judge’s methods saying that the evidence considered by the judge “was not capable of establishing the risk identified” by him. Generally speaking, it is not the place of a judge to rely on their own views and they must take into consideration the evidence before them put forward by the parties. Courts quite frequently rely on expert medical evidence to determine these types of issues.

However, it is unclear from the media reporting of this decision whether the judge had even informed the parties of what he had based his views on. Clearly, this was an error of judgement by his Honour.

The Family Law Act has been amended a number of times to ensure that the risk of harm, abuse, neglect or family and domestic violence are at the forefront of the legislative framework that judges must use when determining parenting orders. I respectfully disagree with his Honour’s interpretation of the legislation. It seems to me that Judge Myer’s view about the mother deciding to get a tattoo and the risk that this could pose to a child is not an unacceptable risk.

When the courts look at unacceptable risk, it is usually in circumstances where they need to determine if a parent or a person poses an unacceptable risk to a child as a result of past behaviour. This might be a situation where there has been family or domestic violence or where a person has a criminal record that might be relevant.

There are decisions going back many years relating to parties having dispute about whether a child should be breastfed. It is often an issue particularly with very young children where they are being breastfed about the amount of time that the child should spend with the other parent. Generally, when a child is newborn they require frequent breastfeeding. Whilst this can be dealt with by the mother expressing breast milk, I have seen a number of disputes relating to how much time a young child can spend with the other parent when breastfeeding is an issue.

Breastfeeding a child is a decision that should not need to be made by courts.

As the saying almost goes, there are two things in life that will always be complicated – divorce and taxes. Unfortunately this situation has become more complicated since 30 July 2014 when the ATO altered its long running position about how certain aspects of property settlements are treated for tax purposes. Prior to 30 July 2014, certain types of transactions including payments from family companies to a spouse under a court order were not considered to be taxable. This allowed parties to use funds that had been ‘parked’ in family companies to meet the obligations under a court order.

It is common for families to use companies or trusts as business structures. This can sometimes be for asset protection purposes or to limit personal liability. The position of the Australian Taxation Office is that payments from private companies to a spouse will now be considered as a ‘deemed dividend’ and will require the person receiving the payment to pay tax at their marginal rate. This could mean that a person receiving a payment from a family company could lose up to 46.5% of this payment in tax.

The effect of the change in position means that one party may have to foot a heavy tax bill or there may need to be some changes about what mix of property or cash is received by a spouse. There are however some areas that remain unchanged in terms of taxation and divorce. CGT roll-over relief and stamp duty exemptions still apply to property settlements.

In terms of CGT, when an asset (or a spouse’s interest in a asset) is transferred as part of a property settlement, any CGT is automatically deferred until another CGT event happens including the sale of the asset.

Stamp duty exemptions provide that there will be no stamp duty payable on the transfer of a spouse’s interest in an asset as part of a property settlement.

Tax issues frequently arise when there are partnerships, companies or trusts involved in family breakdowns. There may also be other small business tax concessions that are available if a spouse or other family members wish to retain business structures or assets. It is important for family lawyers to work closely with accountants and tax advisors to ensure that the most tax effective strategy is put in to effect on the breakdown of a relationship.

It can be hard being a parent.  Over the 14 years, I have worked in family law, I have seen the effect that separation has on parents and their parenting styles.  Unfortunately, it can be easy for parents to get caught up in their own emotional needs and forget both the emotional and developmental needs of the children.
Even in the most amicable of separations, parents aren’t prepared for some of the difficulties that can arise. There is no training course on how to be a separate parent that I’m aware of.  However, there are a number of post-separation parenting courses that can assist in trying to minimise conflicts between parents, assist with co-parenting of children, and provide strategies for maintaining open communication between parents so that the best interests of children are met.
Depending on how separation is handled, the impact upon children can be different. During separation, it is important to build a secure base for children so that the impact is contained. This might include children being taught coping skills and having therapeutic counselling to ensure that they understand what is happening and why. It is important for them to understand that parental separation is not their fault and that they aren’t to blame.
Likewise, it can be important for parents to undertake co-parenting counselling to ensure that they are not involving the children in adult matters and to minimise the possibility of children being caught up in conflict or, worse still, children thinking that they need to take one parent side.
Research undertaken by Prof Jennifer McIntosh of La Trobe University’s Institute for Primary Care indicates that where conflict continues between parents, children can suffer detrimentally. This can include children losing faith and confidence in themselves or their parents, showing their distress through bad behaviour (acting out), reduced academic performance, and in the long term, difficulty forming their own adult relationships.
The Positive Parenting Program (Triple P) has been developed over the last 30 years by Prof Matt Saunders of the University of Queensland. The program now runs in over 25 countries and provides parents with simple and practical strategies to assist in managing the behaviour of children. The Family Transitions Triple P program is specifically designed to help parents manage the behaviour of children when separation or divorce is complicating either the behaviour of parents or children.
The Family Transitions Triple P is aimed at enabling parents to learn assertive communication skills to assist in managing the challenges of co-parenting children. This includes communicating with a former partner, problem-solving techniques and developing styles of co-parenting.
Keeping Kids in Mind is an integrated post-separation parenting course provided by Centacare. This course is offered as a two-day course and covers issues about grief and loss as a result of separation, attachment of children, resilience, communication and conflict resolution, and future planning.
UnitingCare also offers a Post Separation Co-operative Parenting program that aims to assist separated parents who are in conflict to develop constructive communication, in the best interests of their children where there has been a high level of conflict during a relationship.
These types of courses can be delivered flexibly and might be able to assist in ensuring that the best interests of your children are met.
This article first appeared in Border Living magazine’s winter edition, available now – www.borderliving.com.au

As part of our core values, BWB has developed a list of behaviours we expect our staff to observe. One of those is to prioritise the emotional wellbeing of each of our clients. However, we acknowledge that we are not therapists and we will refer our clients to the appropriate counsellor, social worker or psychologist.
Whilst we cannot and should not wear a therapeutic hat, I think it is important as family lawyers, to be able to understand, at least in general terms, the emotional and psychological factors associated with the breakdown of a long term relationship (be it either matrimonial or de facto). We need to be able to recognise if each of our clients is in need of therapeutic support. And, ideally, we work to identify what stage of the grieving process each of our clients is at.
The very well-known and much cited Kübler-Ross model on the “five stages of grief” records a series of emotional stages experienced by survivors of an intimate partner’s death – the five stages are denial (and isolation), anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. The model has been equally applied by social science to divorce/separation as it has to death.
In my view, the importance is fourfold:

Firstly, each client’s instructions about their property and parenting matters can be of critical importance to their lives and may have far reaching and often irreversible implications for them, their former spouse and their children. As a result, those instructions have to be made with a clear head and not when they are emotionally distressed;
Secondly, it is often the case that our clients seek no other professional advice or support prior to their initial attendance with us. The onus is on us therefore, to facilitate that therapeutic support that is, almost always, essential. Some need convincing. The narrative I like to give is that – so far as your financial matters are concerned, that is the easy part, leave it to us. The hard work for you is to ensure you work through the very difficult and confronting emotional and psychological issues. If you ignore these issues, the social science research tells us that you may be okay in the short-term but in longer term can lead to a breakdown and in some cases significant mental health issues;
Thirdly, being brutally honest, sometimes family law clients can be impatient, terse, reactive or emotive – to borrow a phrase from one of the current Justices of The Family Court, “they are good people in difficult circumstances”. It is far easier to empathise with someone and not take any of his or her behaviour personally when you understand the grieving process and at what stage that client is at in the grieving process; and

Finally, and most importantly, some of our clients need to be given a little information and some direction to be able to learn to recognise the stages of grieving over their divorce so they can heal and begin to move on with their new life.
There is a very clever psychologist and leadership development specialist that works with BWB. He equates separation and divorce with a kind of living death. It is death with one huge exception: your former spouse, though dead to you is still living and interacting with all the people you love. Death has finality to it. In most instances, it is also accepted as having been unpreventable. With death there are rituals designed to help the grieving process – There is a funeral, a wake, time off work and a higher threshold for compassion from friends and family. There is widespread acknowledgment that it will take you some time to heal.
Divorce and separation have no real rituals. They have different societal expectations – separated spouses, and their children, are often expected just to continue working, attending school, acting the same. If there is an acknowledgement that you will take some time to heal following any separation, expectations about how long that will take, appear to be much shorter than that associated with divorce.
As a family lawyer, acting as our client’s therapist on the basis of a very small amount of knowledge about the grieving process that is associated with separation and divorce is dangerous. However, to me the balance is clear – get to really know your client, empathise with them, direct them to the appropriate therapeutic expert and focus on getting the best legal outcome for them as quickly as possible.
If you have any queries about your individual set of circumstances, contact our team of expert Toowoomba divorce lawyers for a free, no-obligation discussion.

The primary purpose of an Independent Children’s Lawyer (“ICL”) is to provide independent and impartial assistance to the Court in determining care arrangements that are in the best interests of the child.
The role of the ICL in family law proceedings was defined for the first time under section 68LA of the Family Law Act in 2006. Whilst their role may vary between cases, ultimately they support and facilitate the participation of the child in the proceedings, gather evidence relevant to the best interests of the child and assist as the ‘honest broker’ in settlement negotiations.
The use of ICLs in family law proceedings further satisfies Australia’s obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is referenced in part VII of the Family Law Act.
Article 3 of the Convention specifically provides that in all matters concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be the primary consideration.
Article 12 of the Convention requires that the appropriate body consistent with procedural rules ensures that children who are capable of forming their own view, be given an opportunity to express that view freely in matters which affect them and that those views be given weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child either directly by them or through a representative.
ICLs are appointed by the Court, generally in complex matters where there are allegations of child abuse and/or family violence, where there is and has been prolonged and intractable conflict between parents, or in cases where both parents are without legal representation and the matter is impacted by complex and difficult issues.
An ICL is not the child’s legal representative and is not obliged to act on the child’s instructions. The ICL will, after considering all the relevant evidence, make recommendations to the Court on what they believe the best interests of the child are. Whilst the Court is not bound by the recommendations of an ICL, the evidence adduced will be considered by the Court when making a final determination in relation to parenting matters.
The fees associated with the appointment of an ICL are usually paid for the by the relevant Legal Aid authority, however, an Order can be made by the Court that either or both parties pay or contribute for the costs associated with their representation. 
If you believe that an ICL should be appointed to your matter or you are unsure of their role and the process, please contact one of our experienced child support lawyers for advice.
Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Toowoomba (07) 4639 0000 or Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Brisbane (07) 3210 0281

For most families within our culture today, intergenerational family life continues to be an important factor in the development and dynamic of family relationships. For many families, a significant part of this dynamic involves grandparents assisting in the care arrangements for their grandchildren on varying levels.
Sadly, the impact of separation between a couple or a relationship breakdown between family members can often result in children feeling disconnected and isolated from their grandparents and vice versa.
The current state of play
Earlier reforms to the family law legislation ensured that grandparents had standing to bring an application before the Court to spend time with their grandchildren and to reduce the potential for parental separation on the grandparent–grandchild relationship.
Under section 65C of the Family Law Act, a parenting order in relation to a child can be applied for by either or both parents, the child, a grandparent or any other person concerned with the care, welfare or development of a child.
In addition to this, there has been further acknowledgement within relevant sections of the Family Law Act that recognise the important and significant role that extended family members (including grandparents) play in a child’s life.
Section 60B(2)(b) of the Act states that “children have a right to spend time on a regular basis with, and communicate on a regular basis with, both their parents and other people significant to their care, welfare and development (such as grandparents and other relatives)”.
Whilst this may come as a relief to many grandparents, it is important that they understand that in the absence of a court order, they still hold no rights in relation to their grandchildren.
In the event that a formal agreement between the relevant parties cannot be reached, an application to Court may become necessary to resolve the issues that are in dispute. Should this be required, it is important for grandparents to understand that the Court when considering their application, still must have regard to the same factors that it would consider in determining a dispute between two parents of a child. Those factors relate to the best interests of a child and are set out under section 60CC of the Family Law Act.
Grandparents who have found themselves feeling disenfranchised from their grandchildren should seek legal advice in relation to the options that are available to them.
For further advice please contact Best Wilson Buckley Toowoomba on (07) 4639 0000 or Best Wilson Buckley Family Law on (07) 3210 0281

Kokoda Challenge
Since 2004 the Kokoda Youth Foundation has been supporting young Australians in the Spirit of Kokoda – courage, endurance, mateship and sacrifice.

The Best Wilson Buckley Family Law team has participated in the challenge in both 2014 and 2015. In 2015 Dan Buckley and Neal Wood stepped up to take on the 30km trek through the mountains in Toowoomba and not even heavy rain for the days leading up to the event could turn them away.

Read Dan Buckley’s blog on what the Kokoda Challenge means to BWB.

read blog

Duty of Disclosure

Do I really need to give her that?

In order to achieve an outcome that is just and equitable or in the best interests of the child, both parties are obligated in their family law proceedings to comply with a duty of disclosure.

Whilst there are different obligations between property and parenting matters, the underlying principle that runs between both is an ongoing duty and requirement that the parties provide all documents that are relevant to their dispute in a timely manner.

Yes, this does include information that the other party may not be aware of.

Dependent upon your issues, some examples of the documents that you may need to provide may include (but are not limited to the following):

School Reports;
Medical Reports;
Pay slips;
Copies of financial statements and tax returns;
Bank statements;
Information related to any other financial resources; and
Documents outlining any liabilities.

Yes, there are some documents that are exempt from the obligation of disclosure, however the exemption only relates to a limited class of documents. These include documents that remain unchanged and have already been disclosed or documents in which there is a claim for privilege over.

To ensure that you get it right, it is crucial to follow the advice of your solicitor.

In circumstances where a party deliberately fails or refuses to disclose relevant facts and information regarding their case, not only can a lawyer cease to act for the client but the Court can impose a number of penalties.

If a Court does find that a party has deliberately failed to meet their obligations of disclosure, it can after considering the effect of the non-disclosure, make an adjustment in favour of the other party or ascribe a value for that non-disclosed asset or interest.

Should a parties deliberate failure to disclose documents unduly lengthen the proceedings and create an additional burden of costs on the other party, the Court may consider whether a costs order is appropriate in the circumstances.

The duty to make full and frank disclosure is a continuing obligation on both parties and one that is crucial to reaching a just and equitable outcome for your matter.

For further advice on the legal requirements of disclosure, contact Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Toowoomba on (07) 4639 0000 or Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Brisbane on (07) 3210 0281.

An Affidavit is a written account of matters undertaken, or observed by the person who deposes or makes the Affidavit. It generally forms the primary evidence or basis for Orders sought by a party to family law litigation. For this reason, it is crucial to ensure that the content is relevant, accurate and easy to understand. Opinion, summation and hearsay (or matters not directly observed) are generally prohibited in an Affidavit and the Court will generally disregard any evidence of this nature.

Relevance is a very important aspect of an Affidavit. When a Judge is faced with a busy Court list, it is not ideal for a client to weigh their evidence down with trivial details that are plainly not relevant to the issues in dispute.

In determining what information is appropriate, it is often wise to consider whether the material they are including clarifies something that is in dispute, whether it has a purpose and whether it is relevant and directly related to the issue in question.

In cases where the evidence contained in an Affidavit is inadmissible, irrelevant, unnecessary, argumentative, scandalous or opinion evidence provided by a non-expert, the Court may order that the said content be struck out. Failing to comply with the Family Law Rules or the Federal Circuit Court Rules in relation to admissible evidence can not only result in a client’s evidence being given little weight, but it also can go to the issue of costs.

The structure of an Affidavit should be logical and structured. If disorganised, important information can be missed and this may prejudice a case. Discretion must also be exercised in annexing documentation to an Affidavit. A document can be relevant, disclosed formally and relied upon in proceedings, but won’t necessarily be annexed to an Affidavit. Each Court generally has a preference, hence the importance of working with a practitioner that has an exceptional understanding of how best to adduce evidence before each and every different Judge.

Whilst often tempting to adduce evidence from those who support you, bear in mind that the Court does consider Affidavits of this nature to be of a `cheerleader’ variety and they are generally given limited weight. Obviously if a witness has something meaningful to report in relation to something observed, then definitely rely upon them as a witness, but be careful to avoid unnecessary evidence. The Court’s resources are limited, and an informed discretion around the accumulation of evidence is valuable.

For further advice on the legal requirements of disclosure, contact Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Toowoomba on (07) 4639 0000 or Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Brisbane on (07) 3210 0281.

COURAGE, ENDURANCE, MATESHIP AND SACRIFICE, COMPRESSION SOCKS AND ELECTOLYTE GELS
The firm has been involved in the Kokoda Challenge for two years now.

It is a great cause, fundraising for the Kokoda Challenge Youth Program. The Program supports young Australians, delivering key programs and opportunities to youth from all social backgrounds and targeting many different needs.
The program teaches kids discipline, structure and boundaries based on the “Kokoda Spirit” which embodies courage, endurance, mate ship and sacrifice – principles which take their origin from the Australian soldiers who fought on the Kokoda Track in WWII in 1942.

My Grandfather James William Buckley was part of the Kokoda Track Campaign in WWII fighting Japanese forces who were attempting to advance through the mountains of the Owen Stanley Range to seize Port Moresby as part of a strategy of isolating Australia from the US.

Like a lot of diggers who returned home from War, my Grandfather’s experiences in WWII had a very significant and adverse impact on him both physically and psychologically. Unfortunately these impacts were also felt most acutely by his wife and 11 children. Perhaps with a diagnosis and medical and therapeutic intervention his life after the war may have told a different story.

I think to have something so positive as the Kokoda Challenge Youth Program come out of the experience of the Aussie soldiers in PNG is a fitting legacy. It also provides various groups and teams who committed to doing the walk an opportunity to step outside their comfort zone.

BWB have embodied the Kokoda spirit in:

1. Ben O’Neill’s sacrifice in 2014 of leaving his team to help carry a stranger from another team back up the Crebra Trail, after that person had rolled his ankle.

2. Courtney Stewart’s pushing her teammates to run the last kilometre in order to cross the line before a team from another law firm;

3. Zoe Adam’s courage when she injured her knee at the ten kilometre mark – finishing the final 20km with the assistance of paracetamol, caffeine, sugar and willpower;

4. Neal Wood’s act of mateship carrying Zoe’s backpack for 20km, following her knee injury. Also, Neal’s commitment in ensuring we all finished the second leg of the 15km loop. (It is rumoured that one of his team members suggested they call it quits and go for an early coffee and a bacon and egg burger…….)

5. In 2015, following some heavy rains, the amount of mud that covered the track made some of the areas look distinctly Kokoda-esque.

To borrow from the All Blacks Rugby Union team’s management, who suggested that ‘Better People make Better All Blacks’, we’re proud to say of the Best Wilson Buckley Family Law team that ‘Better People make Better Family Lawyers’.

We’re looking forward to lacing up for the Kokoda Challenge in 2016!

I met with a new client the other day. He and his former spouse had reached agreement on how they would divide their assets between them.
Their relationship had been struggling over the last 18 months, and they had reached a crisis point in December last year, when they decided to end the marriage.
Over the last three months, both had worked very hard with individual counsellors (and in my client’s case, a life coach too) to get their relationship back to the point where they were friends again. They were then able to meet to discuss financial matters over a glass of wine. As a result of this they had reached agreement as to how they would divide their property.
Both spouses appeared horrified that so many family lawyers were so readily willing to agitate their agreement. He and his former spouse had consulted with a number of family lawyers (all specialists). In his spouse’s case, she consulted with three family lawyers. According to her, each of them had told her (in one way or another) that they could put some real pressure on the husband to get more cash and assets for her – but it would cost her.
I cannot think of a less rewarding role than one which creates new conflict between two former spouses who have just resolved conflict. In effect, opening up relationship wounds that had so recently just started to heal.
It’s also bad for business. The wife is now acting for herself, whilst we will be preparing the documents (on behalf of her former husband) to formalise the agreement they had reached.
In 2015, we need to reconsider our role as family lawyers – we need to be more flexible, more nimble, more aware of the need to meet our clients’ specific needs and be more in tune with the expectations of a modern user of professional services.
It’s an age where so much information is so readily accessible – it is said that more than 40% of “searches” are undertaken on mobile devices, and the trend appears to be for this information being released in an increasingly more digestible form – pithy blog articles summarising the legislation, “how to” videos showing lay people how to run a particular application and webcasts about how to prepare for and approach a private mediation! In this context, in a client relationship, we need to be providing something much more than just a rehash or interpretation of the law but pragmatic and commercial solutions as to how best navigate their particular circumstances.
By way of an example, in the same client’s matter, we should be able to be nimble enough to facilitate instructions from that client where we are simultaneously:
1.  A sounding board only with respect to the children’s living arrangements, with the parents negotiating terms directly between themselves;
2.  Providing advice to our client about the financial support of their children, but leaving them to negotiate things directly with the other parent; and
3.  Negotiating the financial issues directly with their spouse’s lawyer, with the assistance of both parties’ accountant.
In addition, our mission must be to get the clients matters resolved as quickly as possible.
Sound counterproductive to the “business” of family law?
Imagine the number of future referrals you would get from a client who, having heard the horror stories from friends and family, has had their matter finalised, to their satisfaction, within three months.
Sound unrealistic?
All this would take is for two family lawyers, acting independently on behalf of each spouse, to commit to resolving the matter within this timeframe.
As practitioners, we must immediately put an end to some of the practices that have become commonplace:
Charging clients based on the number of words (or “folios” as some practitioners call them) – it promotes verbosity and rewards inefficiency. Our communications should be to the point and easily understood. We should only charge based on value and how our work has advanced the client’s matter.
Commencing proceedings based on the “size” of the asset pool, because there has been some minor delays or where you think you have run out of ideas as to how to resolve it. The only consideration for filing proceedings in Court must be if your client has specifically instructed you to do so after you have ensured they have clearly understood all of the implications for doing so. For example, he or she understands what the Court’s role is (i.e. it will not seek to “punish” your spouse); he or she understands the effect on the children; he or she understands the effect on the future of the co-parenting relationship; he or she understands the significant costs and delays in a Court system that is heavily under resourced; he or she understands that the result of having a Judge determine your matter carries an element of unpredictability. Spend the time having the tough, confronting and challenging conversations with your client. This is harder for you than just following their instructions but you owe it to them. They may not be in a position to be thinking as rationally or as logically as they would outside of the stress they are currently under. These clients will thank you in the long term.
Stop taking things personally. The client’s matter is not about you or your ego. Further, your personal opinion is irrelevant.
Before you seek to make a point in a letter to the other party’s lawyer, ask yourself firstly, is it relevant to the issue(s) in dispute? Secondly, is it going to help advance or resolve the matter?
Do not treat every matter from the start as though it is destined for litigation. Exhaust all opportunities to resolve the matter first. Exercise some creative problem solving initiatives. Call the other party’s lawyer. We are there to try to resolve issues between clients and their former spouses, not create them.
So, Best Wilson Buckley Family Law has come up with a list of core values, including behaviours we expect to observe and those we don’t expect to observe. The values that relate specifically to the services we supply to our clients are:
We ensure every client is fully aware of the impact of the law (and process) upon them personally.
We build a trusting relationship with our clients, we seek to understand and have an awareness of their experience and we engage empathetically.
We review our accounts to ensure that we have imparted value to our client.
We don’t judge our clients for their choices.
We don’t have a blind focus on only the legal outcome. We look to the implications of every decision, whether financial, emotional or practical.
We don’t undertake work that doesn’t need to be done
We guard against unnecessary aggression and antagonism in our communication with other practitioners and litigants in person.
Are you up for this?
If you have any queries about your individual set of circumstances, contact our team of expert Toowoomba Divorce lawyers for a free, no-obligation discussion.

The Brisbane and Toowoomba offices of divorce and family law specialists are coming together to take on the Toowoomba Kokoda Challenge in 2015. Dan Buckley, Neal Wood, and Ben O’Neill – also known as the Quad Hikers – will undergo the 30km corporate challenge on Sunday 22 March, contributing towards raising funds for the Kokoda Youth Foundation’s ‘On the Right Track’ youth program in Toowoomba.

The program works with young people on confidence, direction, and life skills while making new friends.

If you would like to donate to the Kokoda Youth Foundation you can visit their website here, and to support the Quad Hikers you can donate here

If you are dealing with the emotional stress following either separation or the breakdown of a de facto relationship, Best Wilson Buckley Family Law is here to help.

For an optimal outcome the first time around, trust the family law specialists at Best Wilson Buckley Family Law.

Our Emily Myatt is a committed volunteer at The Advocacy & Support Centre’s (TASC) Toowoomba location. TASC provides free legal services to vulnerable and marginalised members of the community in Toowoomba, Ipswich and South West Queensland. As a firm we’re proud of the selfless acts of our staff, and the opportunity to provide some support to an essential legal service in our community.

The Flower Project
We were recently given the privilege of being introduced to The Flower Project Foundation, and hosted a Flower Arranging Workshop in Brisbane.

The Flower Project is not your average charity. They do not raise funds to support one particular cause; rather they support everyone and anyone’s cause in their own unique way. They are a charity who brightens people’s lives through the simple, but powerful gift of giving flowers.

The Flower Project enables people to “nominate” a recipient who they believe is in need of a ‘’pick me up”, or deserves a little bit of recognition for their efforts in the community, such as carers, foster parents or maybe a volunteer in the community.

Bouquets of flowers can also be purchased through the charity (through their partner Petals Network), like you would any other florist. A generous 20% of the costs of the order go back to the charity to help with the funds required for the recipient bouquets.

We encourage you to read more about The Flower Project, their work, or even order a bouquet! http://www.theflowerproject.org.au/

Great Endeavour Rally 2014
Best Wilson Buckley Family Law was proud to be a part, albeit from the comfort of our own office, of the 2014 Great Endeavour Rally. We contributed to the fundraising efforts of Marc Kennedy in his quest.

If you’re interested in the Rally or becoming part of the fun in 2015 here’s the official website.

Student Awards
We believe in supporting the next generation of legal talent and have maintained a close relationship with the University of Southern Queensland’s Law Faculty over a number of years.

BWB sponsors the Best Advocate Prize for USQ’s Secondary Schools Mooting Competition, which started in 2014.

Our seasoned team, including Andrew McCormack and Neal Wood, both volunteer time to coach teams and provide mooting tips to USQ students, providing some valuable insight into mooting.

The final for 2015 took place on Sunday 16 August, and after a worthy competition St Joseph’s College was awarded as the winning team. BWB’s Best Advocate Prize was awarded to Ms Clancy Tully of Downlands College.

The 2014 Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Advocate’s Prize was awarded to an advocate from St John’s Anglican College at Forest Lake.

It was always Dad’s idea of a good time and his favourite way to catch up. When my family and I used to travel up to his hobby farm at Cooran he would always say to me, “I thought we might have a couple of beers tonight” – as if there was any doubt in the matter.

I remember a time when Dad collected me from hospital, following shoulder reconstruction surgery. My arm was in a sling and I had an IV drip connected to a pump that delivered morphine into a catheter inserted into my arm every 15 minutes or so. As he helped me into the car he said to me, “I thought we might have a couple of beers tonight”. I just looked at him then looked down at the IV drip and pump. He then said, “Maybe tomorrow night”.

Growing up I came to see Dad’s couple of beers as his way of switching off from work each day. He was an extraordinarily mentally tough individual but I think he had developed some good coping mechanisms for being able to sustain the sort of pressure he was under. He would never have heard of the concept of “mindfulness” but this was exactly what he would “practice” from time to time: shining shoes and sitting on a tractor were his forms of meditation.

I used to study in the spare room next door to his chambers. One day I was lamenting the fact that I had to balance studying two degrees at two different uni’s and playing rugby at the same time! (Embarrassingly I was living at home at that time). I remember walking into his room and looking at the different “sections” on his desk – he was nothing if not pathologically organised. In front of him he was writing his Reasons for Judgment from a recent trial he had presided over. To the left side was a paper he was delivering as President of the AIJA (Australia Institute of Judicial Administration). To the right of him, he was developing the curriculum for family law for one of the Universities, whilst adjacent to that, he was writing a journal article for another. He had the usual pile of “personal” papers behind him – requests from godchildren and mate’s kids for references; a eulogy for our late next door neighbour “in draft”; letters from family members and old friends seeking advice. Stunned by the sight and magnitude of the differing roles he was playing, I said to him, “How do you sleep at night?”. Confused by the question he replied, “Fine”.

As was set out in the Eulogies at his funeral and the various articles that followed, his contributions to the Family Court were extensive. (Always preferring honesty over humility, no doubt be would have noted a few of his achievements that were missed!).

Far from being a judge in the mould of a classic intellectual or academic Judges like a Justice Lindenmeyer or a Justice Warnick (although he did use to bang on about his role in the full court decision of Figgins v Figgins), his contributions to the Court were more from an administrative and organisational perspective. From 1988 to 2004 he was a Judge Administrator of the Court, initially responsible for the judicial administration of the Court in Queensland and the Northern Territory, later New South Wales and eventually as Senior Judge Administrator for the whole of Australia.

In 1989 Dad was appointed chair of a working party to review the administration of the Family Court. The result was a two-volume Report which provided a basis for the Court’s administration. It was said to be instrumental in influencing the way the Court approached the management of its increasing workload and it culminated in the rewriting of the Court’s Rules in 2004. The revision to these Rules included the “pre-action protocols”, which set out the obligations of parties to make a genuine attempt to resolve their disputes before starting Court proceedings.

All through his career he was committed to a concept of what was “fair”. He was involved in a lot of cross-cultural and gender awareness programs, both in his capacity as a Judge and as President of the AIJA. He was a consultant to various developing nations who sought to introduce a family law system, including the Law Reform Commission of Fiji.

He was also committed to judicial training. He was said to be a pioneer in the development of judicial education programs, including social context education involving both gender and cross-cultural issues. He was a member of the Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute which facilitated the delivery of education programs to judicial officers in Commonwealth countries.

He also fitted in a lot of travel, a hell of a lot of fly-fishing and finished each day with a couple of beers.

Dad died a year ago today. We miss you old boy.

Great Endeavour Rally 2014

Best Wilson Buckley Family Law was proud to be a part, albeit from the comfort of our own office, of the 2014 Great Endeavour Rally. We contributed to the fundraising efforts of Marc Kennedy in his quest.

If you’re interested in the Rally, or becoming part of the fun in 2015 here’s the official website.