IBSEN & LABODA

This case involved parenting, property settlement, spousal maintenance, and child support proceedings between Mr Ibsen (the father) and Ms Laboda (the mother), who are the de facto parents of two children. The parties had separated under one roof, after which the mother vacated the family home with the children. The father challenged the mother's withdrawal of funds from a joint account, and the mother had obtained an intervention order. The relationship was highly conflictual, with both parties denigrating each other in the presence of the children, leading to difficulties in parenting arrangements. A family report writer considered the mother's conduct to be alienating and recommended increased time with the father, after which parenting arrangements improved somewhat. The parties ultimately proposed detailed prescriptive orders, including provisions for international travel and an airport watch list.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. In relation to parenting, the court had to decide on appropriate orders for equal shared parental responsibility, residence, and time spent with each parent, as well as provisions for communication, overseas travel, and other parenting matters, including the removal of the children from the Family Law Watch List. The court also had to determine the parties' respective property interests, considering their financial and non-financial contributions, and whether an adjustment was just and equitable. Furthermore, the court was asked to consider the mother's claim for spousal maintenance and the father's application for departure from an administrative assessment of child support.

The court's reasoning in parenting matters was guided by the paramount consideration of the children's best interests, as mandated by section 60CA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court acknowledged the broad discretion conferred by section 65D, which must be exercised judicially and in accordance with the objects and principles of section 60B. The court considered the primary considerations under section 60CC(2), namely the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents and the need to protect the children from harm, as well as the additional considerations under section 60CC(3). In property settlement, the court found it just and equitable to adjust the property interests, considering the parties' contributions and the modest asset pool. The mother's applications for spousal maintenance and departure from child support assessment were dismissed, with the court finding no special circumstances or relevant grounds to depart from the administrative assessments, and noting the mother's receipt of a significant inheritance.

The court made detailed orders regarding parenting, including equal shared parental responsibility, with the children to live with the mother and spend time with the father according to a specified schedule. Provisions were made for communication, overseas travel with conditions including notice periods and security for the mother's travel, and the removal of the children from the Family Law Watch List. In property settlement, the proceeds of sale of a property were divided, with specific amounts allocated to each party and a percentage split of any residue. Other property was to be retained by each party. The mother's applications for spousal maintenance and child support departure were dismissed. All previous orders were discharged.