HAYES & STAPLETON

In *Hayes & Stapleton*, Judge Scarlett of the Family Court of Australia considered an application alleging 31 separate contraventions of parenting orders. The primary dispute concerned whether there was sufficient evidence to establish a case to answer for each alleged contravention, and whether certain documents could be enforced as parenting orders.

The court was required to determine several key legal issues. These included whether the respondent had a case to answer in relation to each of the 31 alleged contraventions, the evidentiary sufficiency for each allegation, and the enforceability of a fact sheet as a parenting order under section 65DA(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Additionally, the court considered whether allegations of contravention were void for duplicity and the admissibility of hearsay evidence, specifically representations made by a child.

Judge Scarlett's reasoning involved a detailed examination of the evidence presented for each alleged contravention. The court applied principles relating to the standard of proof required to establish a contravention and the requirements for a valid parenting order. The decision also addressed the specific evidentiary rules concerning hearsay in the context of child representations.

As a result of the determination, Counts 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 23, 24 and 25 of Application 1 were dismissed. Counts 1 and 2 of Application A2 were also dismissed as incompetent. The applications were adjourned for further hearing, with directions for the respondent to file and serve an affidavit outlining the facts upon which she sought to rely.