BRENNAN & EMERY

The case of *Brennan & Emery* involved proceedings before Tree J in the Family Court of Australia concerning the living arrangements and parental responsibility for two children, J and N. The dispute centred on the children's best interests, with the mother seeking sole parental responsibility and orders for the children to live with her, while the father sought supervised time with the children.

The court was required to determine several key legal issues. These included whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility should be rebutted due to family violence and allegations of harm to the children by the father. The court also had to assess the risk of physical or sexual harm posed by the father to the children, considering specific disclosures made by one of the children and a step-child. Furthermore, the court needed to decide on the children's living arrangements, the extent of the father's time with the children, and ultimately, who should have sole parental responsibility.

Tree J reasoned that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to family violence involving both children and other allegations of violence by the father. The court found that the father presented an unacceptable risk of sexual abuse to the child, despite not being persuaded on the balance of probabilities that specific alleged assaults occurred, due to the absence of an opportunity to challenge the child's version of events. The court also noted the children's medical conditions, the practical difficulties in arranging supervised time due to distance, and the father's lack of capacity to meet the children's emotional needs. Consequently, the court ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children and that they live with her. The father was granted liberty to apply for supervised time if he could identify an appropriate and proximate contact centre, but all other applications were dismissed.