ANDERSON & TAYBOR

In the matter of *Anderson & Taybor*, heard by Hannam J, the dispute concerned an application by the mother seeking to reverse existing parenting orders concerning the child E. The mother contended that there had been significant changes in her circumstances warranting a fresh hearing.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the threshold established by the rule derived from *Rice & Asplund* (1979) FLC 90-725 had been met, thereby justifying a reconsideration of the existing parenting orders in light of the child's best interests. A secondary issue related to costs, with the Independent Children's Lawyer seeking a specific sum and the father seeking costs on an indemnity basis, given the applicant's lack of success.

Hannam J applied the principles from *Rice & Asplund*, which require a significant change in circumstances to justify a fresh hearing to vary existing parenting orders. The court found that the mother had failed to demonstrate such a significant change. Consequently, the mother's application was dismissed. The court also ordered that the mother required leave to file any further applications concerning the child before the age of eleven.

The mother was ordered to pay the costs of the Independent Children's Lawyer in the sum of $3,988 within two months. Furthermore, the mother was ordered to pay the father's costs incurred since 12 October 2012 on an indemnity basis, either as agreed or as assessed by an Assessing Officer, with specific timeframes for payment stipulated. All other outstanding applications were dismissed.