Auburton and McGuiness

The Family Court of Australia heard proceedings between Mr Auburton (the Father) and Ms McGuiness (the Mother) concerning their three children. The dispute involved final parenting orders regarding the children's living arrangements and parental responsibility. The Father did not appear at the hearing, and the matter proceeded on an undefended basis.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility applied, and if not, what final parenting orders should be made to ensure the children's welfare. The Court was required to determine the children's living arrangements, the allocation of parental responsibility, and the nature and extent of any contact between the Father and the children, particularly in light of the Father's criminal convictions.

Justice Kent found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility did not apply due to the Father's convictions for sexual abuse of one of the subject children and for using a carriageway to access child pornography. The Court applied principles of child welfare and safety, noting the Independent Children's Lawyer supported the Mother's final parenting orders. The Court reasoned that the Father's past conduct and convictions posed an unacceptable risk to the children.

Consequently, the Court ordered that the children live with the Mother and that she have sole parental responsibility. The Father was restrained from initiating any form of communication with the children, though the children were granted liberty to communicate with him at their wishes, with the Mother to facilitate such communication. The Court also ordered that a Family Consultant explain the orders to the children.