H & H

This matter came before Strickland J in the Family Court of Australia concerning interim parenting orders for residence and contact. The dispute involved the arrangements for a child pending a final hearing.

The court was required to determine the principles governing the making of interim parenting orders, specifically focusing on how to best promote the child's interests in the context of interlocutory proceedings. The central legal issue was how to balance the need for stability in a child's life with other considerations when deciding on temporary residence and contact arrangements.

Strickland J articulated a set of principles for determining interim parenting orders, emphasizing that the best interests of the child are paramount, as mandated by s 65E of the relevant Act. The court held that, as a general rule, interim orders should promote stability in the child's life. Where a child is well-settled in their current environment, stability is usually best served by continuing those arrangements unless there are strong indications of welfare concerns. The court also noted that it is entitled to weigh the importance of maintaining the status quo, considering how the current arrangements arose, their duration, and any undue delay in proceedings. If the child is not well-settled, a limited evaluation of relevant matters under s 68F(2) is necessary, always mindful of the interim nature of the proceedings. Factors to consider when assessing whether a child is well-settled include the child's wishes, age and maturity, current and proposed care arrangements, the duration of the current environment, sibling arrangements, relationships with significant adults, and educational needs.