HAYES & HAYES

In the matter of HAYES & HAYES, Harper J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning two children. The dispute arose from the mother's contention that the father should only have supervised time with the children until they turned 18, citing significant concerns about his capacity to parent, mental health, and substance use. While the children expressed a wish to spend time with their father, he had accepted that they should continue to live with the mother, with whom they already resided.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. Firstly, it needed to decide on the appropriate parenting arrangements for the children, specifically regarding parental responsibility and where the children would live, in light of the parties' agreement and the mother's specific concerns. Secondly, the court had to consider the admissibility of a transcript of a recording made by one of the children, which the father sought to rely upon. The mother opposed its admission, arguing it was irrelevant, contravened the *Surveillance Devices Act 2007* (NSW), and should be rejected under s 138 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) or the court's powers in Division 12A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

Harper J reasoned that while the transcript could not be found to have no probative value, it should be rejected under the court's powers in s 69ZX of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), applying the principles in s 69ZN. The court found it inappropriate to make a finding that the child had contravened the *Surveillance Devices Act 2007* (NSW), particularly as the child was influenced by the father's narrative of victimhood in collecting evidence. Consequently, the court ordered the discharge of all previous parenting orders, dismissed the father's application for contravention, and, by consent, ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility and that the children live with her.