BEDWELL & GAISFORD

In the matter of Bedwell & Gaisford, Judge Young considered an interim application concerning an 11-year-old child, Y, who had been offered a school scholarship interstate. The father opposed Y's relocation at that time, while the child had expressed a wish to move to Adelaide. The court was required to determine whether Y should be permitted to relocate interstate to take up the scholarship.

The central legal issue before the court was how to balance the child's expressed wishes with the father's opposition to the relocation, particularly in the context of an interim application. The court also had to consider the weight to be given to the child's wishes, given her age and the nature of the opportunity presented by the scholarship.

Judge Young determined that the child's wishes should be given significant weight. The court ordered that Y be permitted to attend B School in Adelaide in 2021. In addition to this primary order, the court made detailed consent orders regarding Y's time with each parent during Christmas and other special occasions, including birthdays. The orders also established specific communication protocols between the parents, including restrictions on communication methods and provisions for facilitating communication between the child and the non-resident parent. Furthermore, injunctions were issued restraining both parents from denigrating the other parent or exposing the children to inappropriate adult issues or the particulars of the family law proceedings. The court also made orders concerning the child X's ongoing attendance with a psychologist, requiring a report on X's relationship with the father and strategies for managing it, and authorised the psychologist to speak with either parent. Finally, the court requested documents and information from Territory Families regarding any abuse allegations or investigations concerning the children and ordered the parties to enrol in a post-separation parenting program.