Calstrom and Tetlow

In the matter of *Calstrom and Tetlow*, heard before Judge Young, the dispute concerned the living arrangements and time spent with a child, X, born in 2014. The court was required to make orders regarding the child's residence and the nature and frequency of contact between the child and the respondent mother.

The court was tasked with determining the primary residence of the child and the specific schedule for the child to spend time with the mother. Additionally, the court needed to address the practical arrangements for the handover of the child between the parents, including the locations for these exchanges. The court also considered the appointment of an Independent Children's Lawyer and the preparation of a family report to assist in determining the child's best interests.

Applying the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975*, the court ordered that the child X live with the father. The mother was granted time with the child on a three-week rotating basis, with specific details outlined for each week, including a week where there would be no time spent. Handovers were to occur between City B and City C. Pursuant to Section 68L of the Act, an Independent Children's Lawyer was appointed to represent the child's interests. Furthermore, the parties and the child were ordered to attend upon a family consultant for the preparation of a family report, which was to address the child's views, relevant sections of the *Family Law Act 1975*, and any other matters pertinent to the child's welfare. The proceedings were adjourned for a trial call over mention.