Astin & Harlow

In the matter of *Astin & Harlow*, heard before Barry J, the dispute concerned allegations by the mother of numerous and repeated contraventions by the father of existing parenting orders concerning their children. The parties were the sole witnesses to the incidents in question.

The court was required to determine whether the father had a reasonable excuse for the alleged contraventions. The father’s defence relied on advice received from his solicitors and confusion arising from concurrently operating orders. The mother also sought leave to re-litigate children's issues, but failed to adduce the necessary grounds for such an application under *Rice v Asplund*.

Barry J dismissed the nine contraventions alleged in the mother's applications dated 22 June 2007 and 1 July 2007, finding that the father had a reasonable excuse for his conduct, including reliance on legal advice and the existence of conflicting orders. The court also dismissed the mother's application dated 25 July 2007, denying her leave to re-litigate the children's issues due to her failure to meet the *Rice v Asplund* threshold. All other outstanding contraventions were dismissed by consent. The mother was ordered to pay 50% of the father's taxed costs.