BICKFORD & BICKFORD

In the matter of Bickford & Bickford, heard by Judge Blake, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for two children, X and Y, and related financial matters. The Applicant father sought orders for equal shared parental responsibility, an expansion of his time with the children, and for the children to continue living with the Respondent mother. Conversely, the Respondent mother sought sole parental responsibility, with no time spent with the Applicant except by written agreement, and a change of the children's surname to her current partner's surname. The mother's application for sole parental responsibility was based on allegations of family violence, witnessed by the children, and the father's alleged recklessness in their care and denigration of the mother in their presence.

The court was required to determine the most appropriate parenting orders for the children, considering the principles of equal shared parental responsibility and the children's best interests. This involved assessing the allegations of family violence and recklessness made by the mother against the father, and the father's assertion of a meaningful relationship with the children. Additionally, the court had to consider the application for a change of surname for the children and the division of property, including the family home. The standard of proof for the allegations of family violence and recklessness was the balance of probabilities, with the court acknowledging that clear evidence is required for serious allegations.

The court ultimately made orders for equal shared parental responsibility, with the children to live with the mother. The father was granted significant time with the children, with a phased introduction of progressively increasing periods of time, including overnight stays and alternate weekends. The court also ordered that the children retain the surname "Bickford". Injunctions were granted restraining both parties from criticising each other in the presence of the children. The parties were directed to engage in counselling and a specific parenting program. Financially, the respondent was ordered to pay the applicant a sum of $28,246.28, with provisions for the occupation and eventual sale of the family home to satisfy this payment and other encumbrances. The court also made orders for the division of other property and for each party to forego claims to the other's superannuation.