Judd & Pryor (No.2)

In *Judd & Pryor (No.2)*, Austin J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father to re-contest final parenting orders made in September 2016. These orders stipulated that the child, who is now 15 years of age, would spend no time with the father. The mother sought the immediate dismissal of the father's application, arguing that there had been no material change in circumstances to warrant reopening the final orders.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the father had demonstrated a material change in circumstances sufficient to justify a revision of the existing final parenting orders, applying the principles established in *Rice & Asplund*. This required the court to consider the past circumstances, including the reasons for the original decision and the evidence upon which it was based, the likelihood of the orders being varied significantly, and whether the need for variation outweighed the detriment to the child of fresh litigation.

Austin J reasoned that the evidence adduced by the father tended to confirm the correctness of the previous findings and demonstrated an absence of any change in circumstances. The father's continued disrespectful attitude towards the mother and his admission of being a "hothead and opinionated" indicated that assertive aggression remained a feature of his character. Furthermore, the child, now 15, had not voluntarily sought contact with the father since the 2016 orders, which were intended to remain in effect until the end of his minority.

Consequently, the court found no evidentiary basis to conclude that the parenting dispute should be reopened. The father's Initiating Application and the mother's Amended Response were dismissed, with no order as to costs.