Epworth and Kerr

In the Family Court of Australia at Albury, Justice Brown considered parenting orders concerning two children, J and T, and their parents, Mr. Epworth (the father) and Ms. Kerr (the mother). The proceedings had a lengthy history, with original applications filed in 1995. The immediate dispute arose from applications for parenting orders after the matter was transferred from the Local Court. The mother had largely absented herself from the proceedings, with her whereabouts being unknown to the court and her former solicitors.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children, specifically regarding their residence, day-to-day care, welfare, and development. This involved considering the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under the *Family Law Act 1975* and whether it applied in this case, given the mother's absence and the history of the proceedings. The court also had to consider the primary considerations outlined in section 60B of the Act, namely the importance of a meaningful relationship with both parents and the need to protect children from harm, as well as the additional considerations in section 60CC.

Justice Brown reasoned that while the *Family Law Act 1975* generally presumes equal shared parental responsibility, this presumption does not apply if there are reasonable grounds to believe a parent has engaged in abuse or family violence, or if it would not be in the child's best interests. Given the mother's prolonged absence, her lack of participation in the proceedings, and the evidence of her turbulent life and the exposure of the children to inappropriate behaviour and risk of harm, the court found it impracticable to order genuine consultation and agreement on significant issues. Consequently, the court ordered that the children live with the father and that he have sole responsibility for decisions regarding their education, health, religion, and residence, subject to advising the mother of any change in residence. The mother was to spend time with the children as agreed between the parties. The court dismissed the independent children's lawyer's application for costs.