Fanning and Wilkinson

This matter concerned parenting orders sought by Ms Fanning and Mr Wilkinson regarding their child. The dispute involved the living arrangements for the child, parental responsibility, and the time the child would spend with each parent. The case was heard by Faulks DCJ.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child in relation to where the child would live, who would have parental responsibility, and the specific arrangements for the child's time with each parent. This included considerations regarding day-to-day care, notification of school and medical information, and the practicalities of communication and handovers between the parents. The court also had to address specific restraints to be placed on each parent's contact with the other and with third parties.

In reaching its decision, the court applied the paramount consideration of the best interests of the child, as mandated by section 60CA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court considered the primary considerations under section 60CC(2), namely the benefit to the child of a meaningful relationship with both parents and the need to protect the child from harm. Additionally, the court took into account the numerous additional considerations outlined in section 60CC(3), including the child's views (if relevant), the nature of the relationship with each parent, the parents' willingness to facilitate a relationship with the other parent, the likely effect of changes in circumstances, the practicalities of contact, the capacity of each parent to provide for the child's needs, and the maturity and background of the child and parents. The court also made orders pursuant to section 68B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to restrain certain forms of communication and contact between the parents.

The court ordered that the child live with Ms Fanning and that she have sole parental responsibility. Notwithstanding this, each parent was to have responsibility for the child's day-to-day care and wellbeing when the child was with them. Detailed orders were made concerning communication, the sharing of information about the child's schooling and medical care, and the specific schedule for the child to spend time with Mr Wilkinson. These arrangements included provisions for supervised handovers, the use of a communications book, and restraints on direct contact between the parents. The court also discharged the Independent Children's Lawyer and made orders regarding the involvement of the Chief Executive of the Department of Disability, Housing and Community Services.