GABALIS & AKULA

In *Gabalis & Akula*, heard by Judge Altobelli, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for a child with special needs. The child was resisting any contact with the father, and the court harboured serious reservations about the father's capacity to meet the child's needs. The court considered the impracticality of supervised time on an indefinite basis and found no practical utility in further counselling, concluding that additional interim orders would not benefit the child.

The court was required to determine the appropriate parenting orders, specifically regarding parental responsibility, the child's residence, and the extent of communication and contact between the parents and the child. Further issues included the need for personal protection orders for the mother and child, and restrictions on the father's conduct, particularly concerning social media.

Judge Altobelli reasoned that given the child's resistance to contact and the court's concerns about the father's capacity, it was in the child's best interests for the mother to have sole parental responsibility, including sole decision-making authority on significant matters such as education, health, and travel. The court also imposed significant injunctive orders against the father, restraining him from communicating with the mother or child, approaching their home or school, and from posting derogatory remarks or details of the proceedings on social media. These protective measures were deemed necessary for the child's and mother's safety, with a power of arrest attached to the personal protection order. The court also mandated that each parent refrain from making negative remarks about the other to the child.

The final orders stipulated that the child live with the mother, who would have sole parental responsibility, with the father being restrained from any communication with the mother or child. The mother was also permitted to apply for the child's passport without the father's consent.