Dansey & Dansey

In *Dansey & Dansey*, Berman J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father for a recovery order for the children, X and Y, following the mother's unilateral relocation of their residence intrastate. The mother opposed any time spending with the father and raised allegations of family violence. The father sought the return of the children to his care.

The central legal issues before the court were whether to grant a recovery order for the children, how to facilitate the children spending time with the father, and what measures were necessary to ameliorate any identified risks to the children's welfare, particularly in light of allegations of family violence and concerns regarding the paternal grandparents' involvement. The court was required to determine the best interests of the children, balancing their need to maintain a meaningful relationship with both parents against the potential risks and disruptions arising from the relocation and the allegations.

Berman J declined to make findings on the allegations of family violence at this interim stage, noting that both the mother's and father's accounts were equally open to such findings. The court determined that it was in the children's best interests to maintain a meaningful relationship with their father. To address potential risks, the court ordered that the children live with the mother but spend time with the father under the supervision of the paternal grandparents. The court also imposed injunctions restraining both parents from denigrating the other in the children's presence, using physical discipline, discussing proceedings with the children, and restricting the children's relocation outside a specified radius without agreement. The court considered the disruption of a further move and found that the mother's return to Sydney with the children, allowing them to resume their schooling at Suburb B Public School, would minimise disruption.

Consequently, the court made orders for the children to have equal shared parental responsibility, live with the mother, and spend supervised time with the father. The father was ordered to vacate the premises upon the mother's return to Sydney. No recovery order was made, as the court found no indication that the mother would not comply with the orders.