Family court grants protection to woman who was ‘punched and kicked’ by partner

An order to protect a woman against a partner who punched and kicked her, another to garnish the wages of a father and a third to ensure access to an only child were among the applications made at the family courts on the first day journalists were allowed to report on cases there.

Minister for Justice Alan Shatter commenced legislation at the weekend to allow reporting of cases involving family law within strict anonymity constraints. The cases had previously been heard in private.

At the family Circuit Court in Dublin yesterday morning, initial confusion was replaced by an application to prevent media coverage of a divorce case.

Barrister Lucy Walsh, for the husband, said commercially sensitive information would be disclosed. She also argued that the trial could be prejudiced, given that it had been heard in part before Christmas.

Judge Carmel Stewart said there was nothing in the new legislation that prevented coverage of a trial that had already begun. It was “a red-letter day” in terms of the family court, she said, and access for reporting had “crept up on practitioners”, but “it was a positive development”. However, she ruled that in the circumstances, given the “unique nature” of the company involved, the case should be heard in private.

Before Judge Sinéad Ní Chúlacháin at the busy Dublin District family courts in Dolphin House, there were two ex parte applications for protection orders, made in the absence of the men to whom they would apply. There were also cases involving guardianship of children, maintenance orders and access rights.

In one case a woman told the court she had three boys with her partner in an “on and off” relationship but she was now living in fear of him. She told the judge that last Friday he had got out of his van and had confronted her outside her home and accused her of being with another man.

“He caught me by the throat and threw me to the ground and kicked and punched me,” she said. He eventually left when her teenage daughter shouted “Let my Mam go”, the woman told the court.

The judge granted protection, ordering that the man should not use violence or threaten to use violence against the woman or her children. She also set a date for a full hearing with both parties present.

In a case involving a woman who was seeking payment of maintenance from her estranged partner, the judge also had a role as referee.

Both parties were unrepresented and began to bicker almost as soon as they entered the courtroom. The man, who worked in hospitality, had been ordered to pay €100 a week in maintenance for his two teenagers but had fallen behind and owed between €300 and €500 in arrears. There were also historical arrears of €7,960 that had been frozen by a previous judge.

The man said he could not afford to pay €100 a week. He earned €360 a month but was being cut to a four-day week and his wage would go down to €280.

The woman, who interrupted her former partner frequently, said if maintenance was not paid their children would have to go without grinds, lunch money and bus fare.

The judge said she understood their relationship had broken down but this was their opportunity to address the court and not each other. She made an order that €80 a week should come out of the man’s wages and into the woman’s bank account.

In a separate case, involving access, the court heard an estranged professional couple had reached agreement over almost everything except hours of access to their young daughter.

Both parties were legally represented and gave sworn evidence, including how their daughter had been expecting to spend Christmas Eve night with her father and Santa was to visit the house, but 15 minutes before pick-up the mother refused permission.

The father had to call to his former partner’s house on Christmas morning with some presents. The child was very upset, the father’s counsel said.

The judge granted access to the father on term’s close to his application.