Decosta & Decosta

In *Decosta & Decosta*, Vasta J of the Family Court of Australia considered final parenting orders concerning two children, X and Y. The dispute centred on the father's contact with the children, particularly in light of a significant family violence incident that occurred on 22 July 2018, after which the children had not spent time with the father, save for a brief observation for a family report. The mother alleged coercive and controlling behaviour by the father leading up to the incident, which she later came to understand as family violence, including shouting at and pinching the children. The father denied these allegations, stating both parents engaged in similar discipline and that the mother was the one who wished to end the relationship.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children, X and Y, in making final parenting orders. This involved assessing the nature of the relationship between the children and each parent, the impact of the family violence incident on the children and the mother, and the father's capacity to understand and acknowledge the gravity of his past actions. The court also considered the potential for irreparable damage to the father-child relationship if contact ceased entirely, as noted by an expert, but had to weigh this against the safety and well-being of the children.

Vasta J applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly section 60CC, in determining the children's best interests. The court found that the father's behaviour on 22 July 2018, which included threats to kill the children, posed an unacceptable risk of physical and psychological harm. Despite acknowledging the children's positive interactions with the father during the family report and the expert's view that the relationship was worth saving, the judge concluded that the father was incapable of change and would continue to minimise his culpability. The court also considered that any contact with the father would likely diminish and impair the mother's parenting capacity, leading to negative consequences for the children.

Consequently, the court ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the children, that the children live with the mother, and that they spend no time with the father. The mother was granted leave to apply for travel documents for the children and permitted to remove them from Australia for holiday or school trips without the father's consent. The father was restrained from applying for travel documents for the children.