Brighton and De Caria Angelis

This matter concerned parenting orders made by Kent J in the Family Court of Australia. The proceedings involved a dispute between the Father and the Mother regarding the living arrangements and parental responsibility for their child, B. The court was required to make interim orders concerning the child's residence, the allocation of parental responsibility, and the nature and extent of the Mother's time with the child.

The legal issues before the court included determining where the child, B, would live, who would hold sole parental responsibility for major long-term decisions, and the specific arrangements for the Mother's supervised time with the child. The court also had to consider the child's medical care and communication arrangements between the parents. Furthermore, the court addressed the appointment of a single expert psychiatrist to assess both parents and the preparation of an updated Family Report for the final trial.

Kent J ordered that the child, B, would live with the Father and that the Father would have sole parental responsibility for major long-term decisions, subject to communicating with and taking into account the Mother's views. The Mother was granted supervised time with the child on weekends and on Christmas Day, with specific conditions regarding the identity of the supervisor or, failing that, the use of a Contact Centre. The court also made orders regarding the child's medical practitioners, communication between the parents, and the release of the child into the care of Mr P and subsequently the Father. The proceedings, including the Father's Contravention Application, were listed for a three-day trial commencing on 20 April 2015. The court also made orders concerning the provision of reasons for judgment and reports to the Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services, the appointment and funding of a single expert psychiatrist, and the preparation of an updated Family Report. Leave was granted to the Independent Children's Lawyer to issue updated subpoenas to various entities and individuals. Finally, the court ordered that the parenting orders be explained to the child by a Family Consultant and the Independent Children's Lawyer, and that the particulars of the obligations and consequences of the orders be set out in an annexed document.