Fraser & Fraser

In the matter of SYC 1270 of 2021, Ms Fraser, the applicant, sought a review of a Senior Registrar's decision concerning parenting orders. The dispute centred on the mother's application to suspend existing orders that provided for the children, Y and Z, to spend time with their father, Mr Fraser, the respondent. The mother's application was based on allegations of physical and psychological harm to the children.

The court was required to determine whether to suspend the father's time with the children, given the conflicting assertions of harm made by each parent. This involved considering the paramountcy of the children's need for protection from physical or psychological harm, as stipulated by section 60CC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), in circumstances where each parent alleged the other was the source of such harm. The court also had to consider the children's expressed views, the history of their relationship with their father, and the cultural considerations relevant to the Aboriginal children.

Rees J noted that these were interim proceedings, and no definitive findings of fact could be made without testing all available evidence. The court acknowledged the breakdown in the children's relationship with their father, but found no agreement or definitive cause for this change. The children had been in the mother's primary care since 2017, and there was no suggestion of altering this arrangement. While the mother reported the children's current reluctance to spend time with the father, this view had only been expressed to her, and independent evidence of their wishes was lacking. Although the children had previously enjoyed a good relationship with their father, the mother asserted an unacceptable risk of sexual abuse in the father's household, while the father alleged psychological risks in the mother's care. The court found that forcing the children to spend time with their father in the current circumstances could be psychologically damaging. Therefore, to shield the children from further harm until evidence could be properly collated, expert opinions obtained, and evidence tested, the court deemed suspending the father's time with the children to be the least worse alternative.

Consequently, the court ordered that all orders providing for the children to live with or spend time with their father be suspended. The court also directed that particulars of the obligations created by these orders, the consequences of contravention, and details of assistance available to parties be set out in an attached Fact Sheet, thereby incorporating them into the orders pursuant to sections 65DA(2) and 62B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The matter was referred to the Magellan list for rigorous case management and prompt substantive determination.