CRUDEN & SACKITT

In the matter of *Cruden & Sackitt*, Cleary J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning two children, R (born 2001) and Y (born 2007). The dispute involved determining with whom the children would live and spend time, and the allocation of parental responsibility. The court was required to address the complex situation of siblings living in separate households, their differing developmental stages, and significant behavioural issues including school non-attendance.

The central legal issues before the court were: the best interests of the children, particularly in relation to their living arrangements and time spent with each parent; the determination of parental responsibility, including whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility should be rebutted; and the necessity of injunctive relief to protect the children. The court also had to consider the wishes of the eldest child, R, and the strong attachment of the youngest child, Y, to the father's older daughter.

Cleary J reasoned that neither parent had the capacity to care for both children solely, given identified risks in both homes and the mother's difficulties with discipline. The court found that the eldest child, R, due to her age and developmental stage, should live with the mother, who would have day-to-day care, while the father would have responsibility for long-term decisions. For the youngest child, Y, the father was granted sole parental responsibility and the child was ordered to live with him. The presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to evidence of substance abuse and family violence. Injunctive orders were made, restraining the mother from attending R's school for 12 months and from allowing either child contact with the maternal grandfather due to a risk of sexual harm.

Consequently, all prior parenting orders were discharged. R was ordered to live with the mother, with specific time arrangements for the father. Y was ordered to live with the father, with specific time arrangements for the mother, designed to ensure the children spent time together on alternate weekends. The father was granted sole parental responsibility for Y, while both parents shared equal responsibility for R, with the mother responsible for day-to-day care and the father for long-term issues. Further orders included restraints on drug and alcohol use, physical discipline, and denigration of parents, along with provisions for communication and the involvement of the Independent Children's Lawyer and Child Protection Services.