Desmond & Yardley

In *Desmond & Yardley*, Gill J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application concerning the time a child, X, would spend with her father. Both parents alleged that the other posed an unacceptable risk to X, with evidence presented suggesting risks existed in both households. The central dispute revolved around whether appropriate protections could be implemented to allow X to maintain a relationship with her father without being exposed to unacceptable risk.

The court was required to determine the nature and extent of the risks presented by each parent and their respective households. Specifically, the court had to assess whether the allegations of risk were substantiated and, if so, what measures, if any, could mitigate those risks to an acceptable level. This involved evaluating the evidence of past interventions by Family and Community Services, instances of violence within the mother's household, and concerns regarding sexualised behaviour by a third party towards children in the mother's care.

Gill J's reasoning focused on balancing the child's right to a relationship with both parents against the paramount consideration of her safety and wellbeing. The court acknowledged the risks identified in the mother's household, including past involvement of Family and Community Services, the presence of a brother with a history of violence, and concerning behaviour by the brother's son. However, the court also considered the mother's efforts to address these issues and her willingness to engage with supports. The court ultimately found that while risks existed, it was possible to implement orders that would allow for supervised time with the father, thereby facilitating the child's relationship with him while mitigating unacceptable risks.

The court ordered that the previous consent orders be discharged. Until further order, X was to spend time with her father on the third Saturday and the following Sunday of each month, with all handovers to occur at B Town Police Station. The parents were enjoined from denigrating the other parent or allowing physical discipline of X. Crucially, the father was restrained from bringing X into contact with his grandfather, Mr C Desmond, and two other individuals, Y and Ms E. The parties were granted liberty to relist the matter on short notice.