Hartnett and Sampson (No 2)

This case involved Mr. Hartnett (the Husband) and Ms. Sampson (the Wife), who were parties to family law proceedings concerning their children, S and T. The primary dispute revolved around the parenting arrangements for the children, including issues of shared responsibility, living arrangements, and time spent with each parent. The matter was heard by Jordan J.

The court was required to determine the specific orders regarding the children's living arrangements and the allocation of decision-making responsibilities between the parents. This included establishing a detailed schedule for the children's time with each parent during school terms and holidays, as well as addressing communication protocols, notification of address changes, and the sharing of educational and medical information. The court also had to consider allegations of family violence and assess the credibility of the parties in relation to these and other matters impacting their parenting capacity.

His Honour, Jordan J, made orders for equal shared parental responsibility for long-term decisions concerning the children, while day-to-day decision-making was allocated to the parent with whom the children were residing. The children were ordered to live with the Husband, with specific provisions for the Wife to spend time with them during school terms and holidays, including a conditional arrangement for the children to live with each parent on a week-on-week-off basis in Sydney if the Wife chose to reside there. The court also made orders for telephone contact, time on birthdays, and notification of medical issues. In his decision, His Honour expressed concerns about the Husband's candour regarding his relationships, but ultimately found himself not satisfied that the allegations of physical assaults against the Wife had been made out. Conversely, His Honour expressed greater concerns about the Wife's reliability, particularly in relation to tape recordings and her explanations for inconsistencies in her affidavit material. Despite these concerns, the court noted the Wife's compliance with contact orders and the positive relationships the children maintained with both parents.