Astarita and Cotton (No 2)

This matter concerned an application by the father, Mr Astarita, and the mother, Ms Cotton, regarding their two children, L and N. The dispute involved the parental responsibility for and living arrangements of the children. Austin J of the Family Court of Australia was required to determine the parenting orders for the children.

The court was tasked with determining the primary caregiver for the children, the allocation of parental responsibility, and the specific time the children would spend with each parent. Additionally, the court needed to address communication arrangements between the parents and the children, and the geographical restrictions on the mother's time with the children. The court also considered the registration of paternity for the children and the associated birth certificate amendments.

Austin J ordered that all former orders relating to the children be discharged. The father was granted sole parental responsibility, and the children were to live with him. Specific, detailed arrangements were set out for the children to spend time with the mother, both before and after the commencement of the 2018 school term, including provisions for school holidays and weekends. The court also imposed restraints on the mother regarding the distance she could take the children and on the father concerning his attendance at the children's school during handover periods. Further orders mandated private communication between the children and the non-resident parent on specific occasions, prohibited denigration of either parent in the children's presence, and established protocols for medical emergencies and information sharing regarding the children's education and activities. The father was ordered to facilitate the provision of school reports to the mother, and both parties were required to keep each other informed of their contact details. Crucially, the court found the father to be the biological father of the children and ordered the Registrar to amend the children's birth certificates accordingly. The parties were also directed to have the children delivered to Child Dispute Services to explain the orders. Costs were reserved.