Barzetti & Ors and Barzetti

The parties to this proceeding before the Family Court of Australia were the mother, Ms B Barzetti, the father, Mr G Barzetti, and the paternal grandparents, Mr C Barzetti and Ms A Barzetti. The dispute concerned parenting orders for the parties' three children, D, F, and R. While no orders were sought regarding the eldest child, D, the paternal grandparents sought orders for time with the younger twins, F and R. The father also sought orders for time with the twins, and the mother sought orders for sole parental responsibility, that the children live with her, and no contact with the father or paternal grandparents. Allegations of child sexual abuse were central to the proceedings.

The court was required to determine several legal issues, including the meaning of "unacceptable risk" in the context of child sexual abuse allegations, the relevant standard of proof for such allegations, and whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility had been rebutted. The court also had to consider the best interests of the children in determining whether to make orders for the children to spend time with the father and paternal grandparents, and whether any action was available to build a relationship between the children and the paternal family.

In its reasoning, the court applied the principles outlined in the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) regarding the best interests of the child and the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. The court determined, to the requisite standard of proof, that the father did not sexually abuse the eldest child, D. However, the court was not prepared to make a finding, to the requisite standard, that the father had sexually abused one of the younger children, F, on the evidence presented. The court found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility had been rebutted by evidence that it would not be in the children's best interests. Furthermore, the court concluded that there was no available action likely to succeed in building a relationship between the children and the paternal family.

Consequently, the court ordered that all existing orders in relation to the children be discharged. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility, and the children were ordered to live with her. Crucially, the court ordered that the children spend no time or communicate with the father and the paternal grandparents. The mother was ordered to forward specific school and medical information to the father and to inform him of proposed surgeries for the children. All outstanding applications were dismissed.