Hillier and Olly (No 2)

This case concerned parenting and property disputes between the mother, Ms Hillier, and the father, Mr Olly. The mother sought orders that the father have no time with the child, citing his history of physical and verbal abuse since separation and a perceived lack of insight into the impact of his behaviour. The father, while consenting to the child living with the mother, sought to spend time with the child. In relation to property, the parties sought orders altering their interests in property, with the mother having earned more income during the relationship and the father having made non-financial contributions through renovations.

The court was required to determine the parenting arrangements for the child, specifically whether the father should be permitted to spend any time with the child, and if so, under what conditions. The court also had to determine the just and equitable division of the parties' property interests, including superannuation.

Forrest J made orders that the child live with the mother and that the mother have sole parental responsibility for major long-term issues, subject to informing and considering the father's written responses. The father was ordered to continue therapy to improve his insight into his behaviour and its impact on his parenting, with the mother and child to participate in family therapy at the father's expense when requested by the therapist. Supervised contact was to commence only when the therapist deemed it in the child's best interests, with specific reporting requirements. The father was also ordered to complete a men's domestic violence behaviour change program. The court also made orders restraining the father from harassing, intimidating, threatening, or assaulting the mother and from attending within 100 metres of her residence or workplace. The father was permitted to attend school events and communicate with school staff regarding the child's academic progress, provided he did not come into contact with the mother or child. The parties were ordered to exchange contact details, and the mother was given discretion to assess the appropriateness of gifts sent by the father to the child. The court also ordered a division of property, with the mother retaining certain assets and a larger portion of funds held in trust, and the father retaining other assets and a smaller portion of the trust funds. A specific superannuation interest was also allocated to the father.