BEST & TYERS

In the Family Court of Australia, Thornton J considered an application by the mother for final parenting orders concerning the child B. The proceedings were undefended, with the father having filed a Notice of Discontinuance. The family had a history of involvement with the Department of Health and Human Services, and the evidence presented was untested.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the final parenting orders sought by the mother on an undefended basis, despite the father's discontinuance of his participation in the proceedings. A key issue was whether procedural fairness had been afforded to the father, given his prior acknowledgment of service and subsequent lack of engagement. The court also had to consider the best interests of the child in making final orders.

Thornton J reasoned that procedural fairness had been met as the father had been served with the application and had not filed any new material or participated since filing his Notice of Discontinuance. The court found that the father had been afforded an opportunity to participate and that the mother's application could proceed on an undefended basis. Applying the principles of the best interests of the child, the court made orders that the parents have equal shared parental responsibility, that the child live with the mother, and spend time with and communicate with the father in specified ways, including regular telephone contact and weekend time by agreement. Further orders addressed communication between the parents, prohibitions on denigration, notification of hospitalisation, and the exchange of information regarding the child's health and education. The father was granted liberty to apply to vary or set aside the orders within 28 days of them being sent to his address for service.