Bahytovich & Anor and Jachai & Anor

The parties to this proceeding were the maternal grandparents (the applicants) and the respondent father, who was in custody on remand for the alleged murder of the child's mother. The dispute concerned the living arrangements and parental responsibility for the subject child. The maternal grandparents sought orders that the child live with them and that they have sole parental responsibility. The respondent father consented to these orders. The intervenor and the Independent Children's Lawyer also consented to the orders sought by the maternal grandparents. The matter came before Kent J in the Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether it was in the best interests of the child for the child to live with the maternal grandparents and for them to have sole parental responsibility, given the circumstances of the respondent father's incarceration and the consent of all parties involved.

Kent J considered the consent of the respondent father, the intervenor, and the Independent Children's Lawyer. The court's paramount consideration in making orders concerning children is the best interests of the child. In this instance, with the respondent father unable to care for the child due to his remand and the consent of all parties, including the Independent Children's Lawyer who represents the child's interests, the court found that the orders sought by the maternal grandparents were in the child's best interests.

The court made orders that the child live with the maternal grandparents and that they have sole parental responsibility. The child was ordered to live with the maternal grandparents in Country 1.