Eddington & Eddington (No 2)

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia heard an appeal concerning parenting and property settlement orders made by Rose J. The appeal was brought by the appellant husband against orders that determined the time the children would spend with him and the division of property.

The primary legal issues before the Full Court were whether the trial judge erred in her parenting orders by failing to provide for the children to spend substantial and significant time with the appellant, and whether the trial judge's conclusions regarding the parties' incomes constituted a miscarriage of discretion in the property settlement. The court was required to consider the application of section 65DAA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) in relation to the parenting arrangements.

The Full Court allowed the appeal against the parenting orders, finding that the trial judge's orders did not, in substance, provide for substantial and significant time for the children to spend with the appellant. The court reasoned that the lengthy periods without any contact meant the orders lacked the necessary quality of time, despite the trial judge's finding that the children had a meaningful relationship with both parties and that the appellant should have substantial and significant time. The court discharged the original Order 4 and substituted a specific 56-day roster detailing the children's time with the appellant. However, the appeal against the property settlement orders was dismissed, as the court found no miscarriage of discretion regarding the trial judge's conclusions on the parties' incomes. The court also granted costs certificates to both the appellant husband and the respondent wife.