DUSTIN & THORNE

In the matter of *Dustin & Thorne*, Justice Austin of the Family Court of Australia determined proceedings concerning the parenting of a child, B. The father had disengaged from the litigation, but the court found that he had been afforded procedural fairness and that it was appropriate to proceed in his absence.

The central legal issues before the court were the determination of the child's best interests, particularly in light of the father's conduct and the existing relationship dynamics, and whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility should be rebutted. The court was required to consider the impact of the father's alleged sexual abuse of the child and the risk of harm associated with any contact.

Justice Austin reasoned that the child's best interests were paramount and that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted as it would be repugnant to those interests. The court noted that the child had not seen or spoken to the father for approximately two years, despite a formerly close relationship. Crucially, the court found that the father posed an unacceptably high risk of physical and psychological harm to the child due to allegations of sexual abuse, and that there was no satisfactory way to attenuate this risk. Consequently, the court ordered that the child live with the mother and have no time with the father. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility, with the discretion to decide if and when the child might spend time with the father in the future. The father was restrained from approaching the mother's home or the child's school, but was permitted to send occasional written correspondence to the child.