Dexter & Parkinson (No. 2)

In the matter of *Dexter & Parkinson (No. 2)*, Bennett J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications and orders relating to parenting matters and contravention proceedings between the husband and the wife. The proceedings involved a contravention application filed by the husband and competing Form 2 applications concerning parenting arrangements for the children, C and A.

The court was required to determine several issues, including the appropriate handling of evidence from a single expert witness, the release of subpoenaed documents, the adjournment and listing of extant applications, and the extension of time for the mother to comply with a costs order. Furthermore, the court had to consider variations to existing parenting orders concerning the father's time with the children, communication arrangements, and the collection of the children for school holiday periods. The court also addressed the father's ability to file an amended contravention application and the mother's ability to file further affidavit material.

Bennett J made a series of orders addressing these matters. Leave was granted for the independent children's lawyer to remove an affidavit from the court file and resubmit it without reference to the deponent as a "single expert witness." Subpoenaed documents were ordered to be released to the parties. Extant applications were adjourned to a specific date and directed to be the sole matter listed. The time for the mother to pay the father's costs was extended, and specific variations were made to the existing parenting orders regarding the father's time with the children, including the recommencement of alternate weekend time, modified communication arrangements due to the children's soccer activities, and specific arrangements for the commencement of school holiday time. The mother was also ordered not to be present near the children's schools at dismissal times when the father was collecting them. The father was granted liberty to file an amended contravention application, and the mother was granted liberty to file further affidavit material. The mother's application for costs was dismissed, and the question of the independent children's lawyer's costs was reserved. The independent children's lawyer was directed to explain the orders to the children.