BROWN & HAYDEN

In the Family Court of Australia, Judge Kemp considered an application by the father seeking to reopen final parenting orders. The mother opposed this application.

The central legal issue before the court was whether there had been a significant change in circumstances since the making of the final parenting orders, such that it would be in the children's best interests to reconsider those orders. The court was required to apply the principles established in *Rice & Asplund* concerning the threshold for varying final parenting orders.

Judge Kemp dismissed the father's application, finding that the evidence presented did not demonstrate a significant change in circumstances warranting a departure from the final orders. The court's reasoning focused on the high threshold required to reopen final parenting orders, emphasising that mere dissatisfaction or a desire for different arrangements is insufficient. The best interests of the children remained the paramount consideration, and the court concluded that reopening the matter would not serve those interests.

The father's application was dismissed. The question of the mother's costs was stood over, with directions for the mother to file a written application within 28 days if she sought costs, failing which there would be no order as to costs. The matter was then removed from the active pending cases list.