Carter & Wilson

Carter & Wilson was an appeal against a decision of the Family Court of Australia in relation to the care and control of a child born during the parties' relationship. The father appealed the Family Court’s decision, which did not grant him shared parental responsibility for the child. The mother had been granted sole parental responsibility. The Court of Appeal dismissed the father’s appeal on the basis that the error made by the primary judge did not affect the outcome of the proceeding. The Court of Appeal found that the father had perpetrated family violence against the mother and another child, and the mother had engaged in controlling behaviour towards the father. These findings led the primary judge to conclude that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility did not apply to the case. The Court of Appeal agreed with the primary judge’s findings and held that the father’s appeal was without merit.

The legal issues in this case included whether the primary judge had correctly applied the definition of family violence and whether the mother's conduct constituted controlling behaviour under the Family Law Act 1975. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge had correctly found that the father's conduct constituted family violence and that the mother's conduct amounted to controlling behaviour. The Court of Appeal also held that the primary judge had not erred in finding that the mother's conduct had led to conflict between the parties. The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had considered the evidence of the Family Consultant but rejected her recommendation for sole parental responsibility for the mother. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge's decision was reasonably open on the evidence and no appealable error had been established.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the father's appeal on the basis that the error made by the primary judge did not affect the outcome of the proceeding. The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge's findings of family violence by the father and controlling behaviour by the mother were correct and that these findings justified the primary judge's decision to grant sole parental responsibility to the mother. The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge's decision was supported by the evidence and that the father's appeal was without merit. The Court of Appeal did not make any orders in relation to the appeal.