Hunter & Uppal

In *Hunter & Uppal*, heard by Dawe J in the Family Court of Australia, the father sought to vary existing parenting orders. The core of the dispute concerned whether the cumulative effect of numerous alleged changes in circumstances since the making of the previous orders warranted a reconsideration of those orders.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the threshold requirement, as established in *Rice and Asplund* (1979) FLC 90-725, had been met. This required the court to determine if the circumstances presented by the father, either individually or when considered cumulatively, were sufficient to justify re-opening the parenting orders. A secondary issue related to the child's proposed international travel.

Dawe J found that, with the exception of the issue concerning the child's international travel, the circumstances presented by the father were not sufficient, either individually or on a cumulative basis, to warrant a re-opening of the parenting orders. The court noted that some of the father's original contentions had already been resolved by subsequent consent orders.

Consequently, the court summarily dismissed the father's application in relation to most of the grounds raised. However, the application concerning the child's overseas travel was referred for directions with a view to a final hearing.