GERASIMOV & ZLOTKIN

In the matter of Gerasimov & Zlotkin, Rees J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father for the disqualification of the presiding judge on the grounds of apprehended bias. The father contended that the judge had failed to inform him of his entitlement to receive the names of three experts and to select one. This application arose in the context of parenting proceedings concerning the child, B, where the mother sought orders for the child to remain in Country J with the maternal grandmother for an extended period, exceeding the father's consent.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the father's apprehension of bias was justified, and secondly, what parenting orders were in the best interests of the child, B, particularly in relation to overseas travel and time spent with each parent and the grandmother. The father's application for disqualification was based on his assertion regarding the expert appointment procedure, while the parenting dispute centred on the child's residence with the maternal grandmother in Country J and the extent of the father's future contact.

Rees J dismissed the father's application for disqualification, finding that the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) did not mandate the specific procedure for expert appointment that the father contended for. The court noted that the father had consented to the appointment of a single expert and had relied on that expert's report. In relation to the parenting orders, the court considered that the maternal grandmother had cared for the child since birth and that an expert opined the child would experience sadness and grief if disconnected from her. The court made orders allowing the child to live with the grandmother in Country J for the extended period sought by the mother and also ordered that the child spend substantial and significant time with the father upon his return to Australia, with detailed provisions for this contact.