Hanton & Rossi

In MLC 13202 of 2018, Mr Hanton was the applicant and Ms Rossi was the respondent. The dispute concerned parenting orders for the child X. The orders were made by O'Shannessy J on 24 June 2021.

The court was required to determine the living arrangements for X, the allocation of parental responsibility, and the nature and extent of the parties' future communication and involvement with X. The court also considered the implications of making orders in the absence of the Father, as noted in the court's reasons.

O'Shannessy J ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. X was to live with the Mother, who was to have sole parental responsibility, with specific exceptions for emergencies and decisions regarding X's name and country of residence. The Mother was required to consult the Father via text or email before making decisions on these matters, consider his input, and inform him of her final decision. The Father was granted liberty to send X letters, cards, and gifts, and the Mother was to encourage X to respond. The Mother was also to facilitate communication between X and the Father if X expressed a desire to do so, and ensure X had the Father's contact details by age 11. The Father was to otherwise spend time and communicate with X as mutually agreed. The parties were to keep each other informed of their contact details and the school X attends. The Father was authorised to receive school reports and access school communication apps. The Mother was to inform the Father of any serious illness or injury to X requiring hospitalisation or specialist treatment. The court also noted that the Independent Children's Lawyer consented to the orders, and the Mother consented to most orders, opposing only the form of order 3. The court also noted that the orders were made in the absence of the Father, and that the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 permit variation or setting aside of such judgments.