HAKIMI & ATIYEH

In the matter of *Hakimi & Atiyeh*, Aldridge J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning the parenting arrangements for a child, Z. The mother, Ms Hakimi, alleged that the father, Mr Atiyeh, had engaged in violent and threatening behaviour towards her and the child. The court found that the father had assaulted the mother on multiple occasions during their relationship, and that the child had been present during these incidents, thereby being subjected to family violence.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the child had been subjected to family violence, and in light of this and other considerations, what parenting orders would be in the best interests of the child. Specifically, the court had to determine whether to order a further attempt at reintroduction therapy between the child and the father, given the child had not spent time with the father since 2011 and had undergone three unsuccessful reintroduction attempts. The court was also required to consider the factors outlined in section 60CC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) in determining parental responsibility and with whom the child should live.

Aldridge J reasoned that the evidence clearly established that the child had been subjected to family violence. Applying the principles of best interests of the child, and considering the history of the relationship, the unsuccessful reintroduction attempts, and the father's conduct, the court determined that it was not in the child's best interests to order further reintroduction therapy. The court granted the mother sole parental responsibility for the child and ordered that the child live with the mother.

Consequently, the court ordered that the child shall not spend time or communicate with the father, unless the child independently indicates a wish to do so, in which case the mother is to facilitate such contact. The father was permitted to send gifts and cards through an agreed nominee, and the mother was ordered to provide school reports and photographs to the father's nominee. The mother was also to notify the father's nominee in the event of the child's serious injury or hospitalisation. All prior parenting orders were discharged, and all applications and cross-applications were dismissed.