Argyros and Argyros

The Family Court of Australia considered an application by Mr Argyros (the father) against Ms Argyros (the mother) for contravention of parenting orders concerning their two children. The father alleged that the mother had intentionally failed to comply with orders requiring the children to spend time with him on Sunday, 24 April 2011 (Easter Sunday), and Wednesday, 27 April 2011. The mother admitted to not facilitating the children's time with the father on these two occasions.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the mother had a reasonable excuse for contravening the parenting orders, as defined by section 70NAE of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The court was required to determine if the mother's actions were taken on reasonable grounds and were necessary to protect the health or safety of a person, and if the period of contravention was no longer than necessary for that protection. The court also considered the onus of proof, which rests on the applicant to prove contravention, and then shifts to the respondent to establish a reasonable excuse.

The court reasoned that the mother's contraventions stemmed from allegations that the father had physically harmed one of the children on the preceding weekend. The mother contacted the police, who took a statement and interviewed the father and his mother. While the police took no further action, the mother was unable to obtain legal advice due to public holidays. She then informed the father that the children would not be available on the scheduled days. The court found that the mother believed on reasonable grounds that not allowing the children to spend time with the father was necessary to protect their health or safety, and that the period of non-compliance was not longer than necessary to address the immediate safety concerns. The court applied the principles from *Childers & Leslie* and *Taikato v R*, emphasizing that "reasonable excuse" involves an objective assessment of the circumstances and the purpose of the provision.

The court dismissed the father's contravention application, finding that the mother had a reasonable excuse for her actions under section 70NAE(5) of the Family Law Act 1975. Consequently, section 70NDB of the Act was not applied, and no provision was made for make-up time. The court also ordered the father to pay the mother's costs of the application in the sum of $1,600.00.