Damani & Lacombe

In the matter of DUC 163 of 2021, Ms Damani (the Applicant Mother) and Mr Lacombe (the Respondent Father) brought their dispute concerning their child, X, before Judge Newbrun. The proceedings concerned interim parenting orders, with the central issue being the immediate return of the child to the Mother's care and subsequent arrangements for the child's living arrangements and contact with both parents.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child, X, in the context of interim parenting orders. This involved deciding on the immediate physical care of the child, establishing a framework for future contact between the child and both parents, and implementing measures to ensure the child's safety and well-being. The court also considered the need for an Independent Children's Lawyer to represent the child's interests.

Judge Newbrun ordered the Father to return the child to the Mother's primary care by 6 pm on 28 May 2021, authorising a recovery order under section 67U of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) should the Father fail to comply. The child was ordered to live with the Mother, with specific injunctions against the Father removing the child from the Mother's care. The Mother was restrained from permitting a named individual, Mr C, to be in the child's presence and from using illicit drugs 24 hours prior to or whilst the child was in her care, with provisions for random urinalysis. Contact between the Father and child was to be supervised by the Mother or an approved agency. Both parents were restrained from denigrating each other and from discussing the proceedings with the child. An Independent Children's Lawyer was to be appointed to represent the child, and the proceedings were adjourned for mention.