Caratha & Laykin

This case involved a dispute between the mother and father concerning the living arrangements and parental responsibility for their child, X. The matter came before Baumann J in the Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine the primary residence of the child, the allocation of parental responsibility, and the specific arrangements for the child to spend time with each parent, including during school holidays and special occasions. Additionally, the court considered the child's wishes, the impact of parental conflict on her well-being, and the role of a child counsellor, Ms D, in assessing the situation.

Baumann J's reasoning focused on the child's best interests, acknowledging the father's difficulties in separating his concerns about the mother's parenting from an objective assessment. The court gave weight to the evidence of Ms D, the child counsellor, who reported the child's stress regarding her father's anxieties and her desire to live with her mother, despite sometimes telling her father otherwise to appease him. The court found that a significant change in residence would have a detrimental effect on the child, given her established living arrangements with her mother and sibling since 2016. The court also noted the absence of family violence orders despite the parental conflict.

The court ordered that the child live with the mother and that the mother have sole parental responsibility, with specific provisions for the father to be notified and consulted on decisions. Detailed arrangements were set out for the child to spend time with the father, including during school terms and holidays, as well as for special occasions. The court also made orders regarding changeovers, the child's attendance with Ms D, and imposed restraints on the father concerning the child's genital area and recording interactions. The court further ordered that the child attend her current school and local high school unless otherwise agreed.