BENEDICT & GILL

In the matter of BENEDICT & GILL, Judge A Kelly of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered an interim parenting application arising from the unilateral revocation of previously agreed spend time arrangements. The core of the dispute involved the best interests of the child, with the court needing to determine the appropriate time the child should spend with each parent.

The court was required to determine several legal issues, including the admissibility of a letter from a psychologist. Objections were raised on the grounds that the letter did not meet the *Makita* principles for expert evidence and that it was protected by joint privilege. The court also had to consider whether the contents of the letter, which prima facie appeared inadmissible, could be admitted under an exception to privilege.

Judge A Kelly reasoned that the *Makita* principles were not relevant as the psychologist's letter expressly disavowed its status as an expert report. Regarding privilege, the court found that while the letter was prima facie inadmissible due to joint privilege, its contents were crucial to determining the rights of the child. Consequently, the letter was admitted under the exception provided by s 131(2)(i) of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth). The court affirmed that it is authorised to decide ultimate facts based on all evidence presented, and expert evidence is not determinative.

The court made interim orders reflecting a Minute of Proposed Orders dated 14 June 2017, which established equal shared parental responsibility and a detailed schedule for the child to live with the Father on a four-weekly cycle during school terms, and with the Mother at all other times. The orders also specified arrangements for school holidays, birthdays, and Christmas, and fixed a final hearing date for April 2018.