AMUNDSON & BOTSMAN

In *Amundson & Botsman*, Dawe J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered an application by the father for final parenting orders. The father sought to vary existing orders concerning the children.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the father had established a sufficient change in circumstances since the making of the previous orders to justify a re-hearing of the parenting arrangements. This involved determining whether any proposed variation would be in the best interests of the children, a paramount consideration under section 60CA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), and whether the potential detriment to the children from further litigation outweighed any likely benefit from a new hearing.

Dawe J applied principles derived from the Full Court's reasoning in *SPS & PLS*, which affirmed the "rule" in *Rice & Asplund*. This rule dictates that continuous litigation over children is generally not in their best interests, and courts should aim for stability in parenting arrangements. However, the court acknowledged that significant changes can necessitate reconsideration. To determine whether to embark on a new hearing, the court must assess past circumstances, the likelihood of significant order variations, and weigh the potential detriment of litigation against the likely benefits of any changes. The court also noted the importance of procedural fairness and the need for a *prima facie* case of changed circumstances that is sufficient to justify a hearing.

The father's application for final orders was dismissed.