GOLDSMITH & GOLDSMITH

In *Goldsmith & Goldsmith*, heard by Judge Small, the proceedings concerned parenting and property matters between the parties. The parenting dispute arose from the children's expressed wishes not to spend time with their mother, coupled with findings of the mother's abusive behaviour, uncontained conduct, and extensive intervention by child protection authorities. The mother had not seen the children for nine months prior to the trial. In relation to property, the parties had divided their assets soon after their separation in 2011, and the wife sought orders under s.79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* to alter their property interests.

The court was required to determine whether it was just and equitable to make any orders altering the parties' property interests, and to make parenting orders that reflected the best interests of the three children, considering their expressed wishes and the mother's conduct.

On the parenting aspect, the court discharged previous orders and made orders for the father to have sole parental responsibility, with the children to live with him. The mother's time with the children was to be at their instigation, according to their wishes, and by written agreement. Injunctions were also imposed to prevent the mother from attending at the children's residence, school, or extra-curricular activities without the father's prior written invitation. Regarding the property dispute, the court found that it was not just and equitable to alter the parties' property interests, given the division of assets in 2011. Consequently, each party was to retain sole entitlement to the property in their possession, with specific provisions for joint bank accounts, insurance policies, liabilities, inheritances, superannuation, and the severance of any joint tenancies.