Flinders & Carmine (No. 2)

The case of *Flinders & Carmine (No. 2)* concerned an application by the father for orders regarding the time the child should spend with him. The mother did not attend the hearing, and the father was unaware of her and the child's current whereabouts. Consequently, the father's application for a Commonwealth Information Order and a Location Order was heard ex parte.

The court was required to determine the parenting arrangements for the child, specifically with whom the child should spend time. A key consideration was the fact that the child had not seen the father for some time, necessitating a careful approach to re-establishing their relationship. The court also had to consider the father's applications for information orders to locate the mother and child.

Strickland J reasoned that a staged approach to the child spending time with the father was in the child's best interests, given the extended period of no contact. The court applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly those relating to the best interests of the child and the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. The court also considered its powers to make information and location orders to facilitate the enforcement of parenting arrangements.

The court ordered that the child live with the mother and that the parties have equal shared parental responsibility. A detailed schedule for the father to spend time with the child was established, commencing with supervised contact and progressively increasing the duration and independence of the time spent together. The court also made orders for Centrelink and the Department of Education and Children’s Services to provide information regarding the location of the child and mother, and appointed a Registrar to sign necessary documents if the mother failed to do so. The father's earlier applications were dismissed.