HOPKINS & BRADEY

The Family Court of Australia heard proceedings between Ms Hopkins (the mother) and Mr Bradey (the father) concerning parenting orders for their child, B. The mother sought sole parental responsibility, with the child living with her and having supervised time with the father. The father initially sought to continue existing consent orders but subsequently failed to participate in the proceedings. The Independent Children’s Lawyer supported the mother's application.

The court was required to determine whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility, as outlined in the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), was rebutted. This involved considering evidence of family violence, including incidents occurring in the child's presence, and the mother's history of alcohol dependence, alongside her efforts to manage this dependence. The court also had to address the father's conduct, including removing the child from school without consent and his failure to comply with court orders.

Ryan J found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to the father's family violence and the impact of this violence on the child. The court also noted the mother's efforts to address her alcohol dependence. The father's persistent failure to participate in proceedings and his actions, such as removing the child from school, further supported the mother's application. The court applied principles relating to the best interests of the child, considering the need for safety and stability.

Consequently, the court made orders discharging previous consent orders and granting the mother sole parental responsibility for the child. The father was restrained from approaching any school attended by the child. No orders were made regarding the child's time with the father.