HOLMES & HOLMES

In the matter of HOLMES & HOLMES, Judge Scarlett considered an application concerning interim parenting orders for two children. The dispute involved the residence of the children and the application of the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility at the interim stage. The court also addressed objections to subpoenas issued to the Commissioners of Police for New South Wales and Queensland.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the children's residence should change prior to a Child Dispute Conference, the appropriateness of applying the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility in interim orders, and the admissibility of hearsay evidence from a person who declined to attend court. The court was also required to determine objections to subpoenas.

Judge Scarlett reasoned that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility should apply at the interim stage, noting that the respondent relied on hearsay evidence from a witness who had declined to attend court. The court set aside the notices of objection to the subpoenas issued to the Commissioners of Police. The court ordered that the applicant and respondent have equal shared parental responsibility for the children, that the children live with the mother, and set out specific time arrangements for the children to spend with the father. The court also listed the matter for an interim hearing and provided detailed directions regarding the filing of affidavits, attendance at a Conciliation Conference, financial disclosure, and the exchange of valuations and other documents.