Dylan & Dylan

In the matter of *Dylan & Dylan*, Carmody J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications concerning both children’s matters and property division. In the children’s proceedings, the father sought orders for equal shared parental responsibility and increased parenting time, while the mother sought to maintain the status quo, aligning with the expressed wishes of their children, a 15-year-old boy and a 10-year-old girl. The Independent Children’s Lawyer and two court experts opposed the father's application, asserting it would not be in the children's best interests.

The court was required to determine whether to grant equal shared parental responsibility and increased parenting time to the father, considering the children's best interests, the weight to be given to the teenage child's views, and the meaning of "substantial and significant" parenting time. In the property proceedings, the central issue was whether the husband's substantial initial capital contribution was offset or diminished by the wife's contributions to the marriage and her likely future financial needs.

Regarding the children's matters, Carmody J found that the children needed to develop a more meaningful and stronger long-term relationship with their father and to have him more actively involved in their lives. This necessitated an increase in the time the children spent with him from minimal to substantial and significant, with the court deeming any potential risk of harm from this increased time to be a worthwhile risk for the children's overall benefit. In the property proceedings, after considering the relevant factors under sections 79(4) and 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), the court ordered a 55/45 split of the total property pool in favour of the husband.