Carmody & Strauss

In the matter of *Carmody & Strauss*, heard before Justice Bowrey, the applicant mother, Ms Carmody, and the respondent father, Mr Strauss, presented differing proposals for the secondary schooling of their two sons, X (born 2010) and Y (born 2012). The dispute centred on whether the boys should attend C School, a private institution favoured by the mother, or B State High School, preferred by the father.

The court was required to determine which of the proposed schools was in the best interests of the children, considering the evidence presented by both parents regarding the academic, sporting, social, and personal development opportunities offered by each institution. Key issues included the children's expressed wishes, the potential impact of attending a religious school, the financial capacity of the mother to solely fund private schooling, and the availability of support for potential behavioural or medical needs, such as the suspected ADHD of child Y.

Justice Bowrey reasoned that neither school was demonstrably superior in a general sense, acknowledging the high quality of both B State High School and C School. The court found that the resources and opportunities available at C School were likely to be matched by B State High School. Ultimately, the court ordered that the boys attend B State High School, primarily due to the significant advantage of their step-siblings attending the same institution, which could provide invaluable guidance and support during the transition to secondary education. The court also noted the mother's potential overestimation of her long-term financial capacity to solely fund private schooling and that the children did not appear to come from a religious background.