EMAMI & ISHMAL

In the matter of EMAMI & ISHMAL, Hannam J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning three children. The dispute involved allegations of family violence, including the father's convictions for assaults on the mother and breaches of apprehended violence orders, as well as other alleged instances of family violence. The children had expressed a view that they did not wish to spend time with the father. Counter-allegations were made regarding the mother's mental health and the potential influence of the mother or others on the children's stated views.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in light of the serious allegations of family violence and the children's expressed wishes. Specifically, the court had to consider whether to discharge existing parenting orders and, if so, what new orders were appropriate to ensure the safety and well-being of the children, taking into account the father's history of violence and the children's views.

Hannam J reasoned that the paramount consideration was the best interests of the children, which necessitated prioritising their safety and protection from harm. The court found that the father's history of family violence, including convictions and breaches of orders, posed an unacceptable risk to the mother and the children. The children's expressed views, despite potential maternal influence, were given significant weight in the context of the father's violent conduct. The court applied principles under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly section 68B, to make orders for the personal protection of the mother and children.

Consequently, the court discharged all previous parenting orders. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility, and the children were ordered to live with her. The father was ordered to spend no time with and have no communication with the children. Further orders were made to remove the children from the Airport Watch List, permit the mother to change the children's surname, and restrain the father from contacting or approaching the mother, her husband, or the children, as well as their residence, school, and extracurricular activity venues. These protective orders were made pursuant to section 68B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), with the power of arrest without warrant. All outstanding applications were dismissed.