Alan and Eastman

This matter concerned parenting orders for two children, [X] and [Y], born in 2004 and 2006 respectively. The dispute involved the father and the mother, and the decision was made by Judge Terry.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in relation to parental responsibility, living arrangements, and time spent with each parent. Key issues included the application of the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under s.61DA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), the need to protect the children from harm, and the impact of past family violence on the children and the parents' capacity to care for them. The court also had to consider the children's maturity, sex, lifestyle, and background, particularly in light of their exposure to family violence perpetrated by Mr G.

The court applied the principles outlined in s.60CC(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), giving greatest weight to the need to protect the children from physical or psychological harm. While acknowledging the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents, the court found this consideration did not resolve the dispute. Crucially, the court found no evidence that Mr G posed a current risk of family violence to the children in the mother's care, nor did it find the mother's allegations of abuse against the father to be substantiated. Consequently, the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was engaged. The court also granted an injunction restraining the mother from allowing the children contact with Mr G and restrained both parents from physically disciplining the children or denigrating the other parent.

The court discharged all previous parenting orders and made new orders. These included equal shared parental responsibility, with the father having sole responsibility for the children's education, medical, and psychological needs. The children were ordered to live with the father, with specific time arrangements for the mother, including alternating weekends and significant public holidays. The orders also detailed communication protocols, information sharing regarding the children's health and education, and provisions for family dispute resolution to review the orders within 12 months.