JJT & CTT

The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia heard an appeal concerning the interpretation of a parenting order. The dispute involved the parents of two children, identified as JJT and CTT, regarding the children's living arrangements and the extent of each parent's responsibilities. The primary judge had made orders concerning these matters, which were the subject of the appeal.

The central legal issues before the Full Court were whether the primary judge had erred in their construction of the parenting order, particularly concerning the allocation of parental responsibility and the definition of "usual residence." The court was required to determine the correct interpretation of the order in light of the parties' conduct and the children's best interests, as mandated by the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

The Full Court found that the primary judge had misconstrued the parenting order by placing undue emphasis on the children's physical location at a particular point in time, rather than the overarching intention of the order regarding shared parental responsibility. The court applied the principles of contractual interpretation to the parenting order, considering the ordinary meaning of the words used and the context in which they were made. It held that the order contemplated a shared responsibility for the children's upbringing, irrespective of their day-to-day location, and that the primary judge's interpretation had undermined this shared responsibility. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for redetermination.