Garzelli and Lewis (No. 3)

This matter concerned parenting and property settlement proceedings before Cronin J. The dispute involved concerns raised by three experts regarding the wife's parental capacity and the risk of the parties' child becoming parentified, with expert opinion favouring minimising the wife's time with the child. The wife, a self-represented litigant, sought property settlement and spousal maintenance but failed to provide supporting evidence. In contrast, the husband presented plausible financial evidence which the court accepted.

The court was required to determine the appropriate parenting orders for the child, considering the expert evidence on the wife's capacity and the risk of parentification. Additionally, the court had to consider the wife's claim for property settlement and spousal maintenance, in light of the lack of evidence presented by her and the financial evidence provided by the husband.

Cronin J accepted the expert opinion that the wife's time with the child should be minimised, leading to orders discharging extant parenting orders and granting the husband sole parental responsibility. The husband was directed to keep the wife informed of major issues concerning the child, including medical treatment and school matters. The court also made specific orders regarding the child's living arrangements with each parent, detailing a fortnightly cycle that would progressively increase the child's time with the husband, with specific provisions for school holidays and Christmas periods. The court further ordered that the child's passports be released into the husband's custody and restrained the wife from obtaining or renewing the child's passport for a specific country without the husband's consent. Regarding property and spousal maintenance, the court made orders for the husband to pay the wife $2000 per calendar month for twelve months, this being the only evidence supporting such an order. The Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged.