DAWKINS & BOREHAM

This matter concerned an application by the mother, Ms Dawkins, against the father, Mr Boreham, in the Family Court of Australia. The dispute centred on the father's alleged interference with the mother's exercise of sole parental responsibility for the parties' child, X. Specifically, the mother sought injunctive relief to prevent the father from communicating with the child or medical professionals regarding the child's health, and from instructing others in a manner that would impact the mother's parental responsibilities.

The primary legal issue before Bennett J was whether the father's conduct warranted the imposition of injunctions under Section 68B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court was required to determine if the father's actions constituted a contravention of existing orders or posed a risk to the child's welfare, thereby justifying the requested restraints on his communication and involvement in the child's care and schooling.

In reaching her decision, Bennett J considered the evidence presented, including correspondence from the mother's legal representatives and a letter from a surgeon to the father. The court found that the father's actions had indeed infringed upon the mother's sole parental responsibility and potentially impacted the child's well-being. Consequently, the court granted injunctions restraining the father from communicating with the child or medical professionals about the child's medical condition or treatment, and from instructing any individual or entity to act in a way that would infringe upon the mother's exercise of sole parental responsibility. The father was also ordered to pay the mother's costs of the application.