Re Bournes & Johnson
[2002] QSC 457
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Re Bournes & Johnson[2002] QSC 457
- Add to List
Re Bournes & Johnson[2002] QSC 457
Re Bournes & Johnson[2002] QSC 457
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CIVIL JURISDICTION
HOLMES J
No 9554 of 2002
SAMANTHA JANE BOURNES | Applicants |
and |
|
CHRISTINE MARY JOHNSON |
|
BRISBANE
DATE 12/12/2002
JUDGMENT
HER HONOUR: This is the matter of Bournes and Johnson. This is an application for a declaration of paternity under section 10 of the Status of Children Act 1978. It is proposed that it be decided without an oral hearing under part 6 of chapter 13 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999.
The applicants, Samantha Jane Bournes and Christine Mary Johnson, are respectively the mother and grandmother of a child, Flynn Daniel Bournes, born on 11 October 2001 in respect of whose paternity the declaration is sought. Ms Bournes, in her affidavit, deposes that she lived in a de facto relationship with the child's father, Brett Andrew Johnson, from November 2000 until 18 May 2000 when Mr Johnson died. Christine Johnson deposes to their relationship and her belief that Flynn Daniel Bournes is the child of her son.
Also filed with the application were affidavits of Patrick Charles Hall and Melissa Jane Tracey-Patte, both solicitors in the firm acting for the applicants. The effect of their affidavits is that attempts have been made to have Mr John Johnson, the father of the deceased, file a supporting affidavit but, although he has said nothing contrary to his son's having been the father of Flynn Bournes, he has not cooperated. It appears that he did not have much contact with Ms Bournes and his son during the period of their relationship.
Section 10(1) of the Status of Children Act enables any person who alleges that a known person is the father of her child or, who having a proper interest in the result, wishes to have the question of whether the relationship of father and child exists between two named persons to apply by originating summons for a declaration of paternity.
The Court may, if it is proved to its satisfaction that the relationship exists, make such a declaration. Subsection 10(4) precludes the making of such a declaration unless the Court is satisfied that so far as is reasonably practicable all persons whose interests are or may be affected by the declaration are represented before or have been given the opportunity of making representations to the Court upon the subject matter of the proceedings.
In light of that last requirement, a further affidavit has been provided from Mrs Johnson. She swears, firstly, that to the best of her knowledge Flynn Bournes is the only child of her son and, secondly, that there were insufficient assets in her son's estate to cover his funeral expenses which she and his father met. She also deposes to her belief that her son's only dependant was Ms Bournes.
On that evidence, I am satisfied that the only persons whose interests could possibly be affected by the declaration are Ms Bournes and Mr and Mrs Johnson, all of whom have had the opportunity of making representations. The affidavits of Mrs Johnson and Ms Bournes have proved to my satisfaction that Brett Andrew Johnson was the father of Flynn Daniel Bournes. With some amendments, I will make the declaration in accordance with the draft provided.