Holinski and Holinski

The Family Court of Australia heard an application by Mr Holinski (the father) for interim parenting orders concerning his two young children, L and N. The dispute arose after the mother left the family home with the children in January 2013 and had not allowed the father any contact since. The father sought equal shared parental responsibility and orders for the children to spend time with him. The mother opposed any time with the father, alleging psychological and emotional abuse by him and his family, and sought orders for psychological assessments, an adjournment pending reports, and permission to relocate overseas with the children.

The court was required to determine the interim parenting arrangements for the children, specifically whether the father should have time with them, and if so, the nature and extent of that time. Additionally, the court had to consider the mother's application to relocate overseas with the children and the father's opposition to this, given his concerns about the children's return. The court also had to address the conflicting allegations of family violence made by each party against the other.

Justice Hannam applied the principles outlined in *Goode & Goode* and section 60B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), focusing on the best interests of the children. The court noted the significant divergence in the parties' positions, with the mother asserting severe abuse and a detrimental impact on her parenting capacity if the children had contact with the father and his family, while the father argued for the importance of maintaining a meaningful relationship with both parents. The Independent Children’s Lawyer submitted that the mother's stance risked irredeemably damaging the children's relationship with their father and opposed the overseas relocation.

Pending further order, the children were to live with the mother. The court ordered that the children spend time with the father under supervision at a contact centre on Thursday afternoons and on Saturdays, commencing with a supervised changeover. The children were also to remain on the Airport Watch List, and both parties were restrained from removing them from Australia. The court further ordered that neither party denigrate the other or their families in the presence of the children and directed the parties to jointly appoint a single expert witness to prepare a report for the court's assistance. The matter was listed for mention to progress the appointment of the expert.