BURGESS & GALBALLY

In the matter of BURGESS & GALBALLY, the mother sought sole parental responsibility for the parties' three children and that the children spend no time with the father. The father had been diagnosed with Narcissistic and Grandiose Personality Disorder, and the children had been exposed to physical and psychological harm in his care. The court was required to determine whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted and, if so, what orders were in the best interests of the children.

Johns J found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to the unacceptable risk of physical and psychological harm the father posed to the children. The court reasoned that it was not in the children's best interests for the parents to share parental responsibility, given the father's diagnosed personality disorders and the history of harm. The court applied the paramountcy principle, focusing on the need to protect the children from abuse, neglect, or family violence in the father's care.

Consequently, the court ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children's long-term care, welfare, and development, and that the children live with the mother. No orders were made for the father to spend time or communicate with the children, although he was permitted to send cards and gifts on birthdays and Christmas to a nominated post office address, subject to the mother's inspection and discretion. The father was also ordered to pay the mother's costs in relation to specific hearing dates.