KATT & PATERSON

In the Family Court of Australia, Ms. Katt (the applicant mother) and Mr. Paterson (the respondent father) were in dispute regarding interim orders for the child, B. The proceedings were complicated by allegations made by the mother of physical and sexual abuse against the father, his partner, and his partner's son. The matter had a long and difficult history, and the court was required to consider the best interests of the child in determining the appropriate arrangements for her time with her father.

The primary legal issue before the court was to determine the interim parenting orders concerning the time the child, B, would spend with her father, given the serious allegations of abuse and the child's best interests. The court also had to consider the recommendations of the Family Court counsellor, Ms. D, who had prepared a Family Report and an addendum report, and the views of the Independent Children’s Lawyer. A further consideration was the significant delays in accessing supervised contact services at Children's Contact Centres (CCS).

Justice Burr, applying the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly concerning the best interests of the child, ordered that B live with the mother, who would have sole parental responsibility. The father was to spend time with B each alternate Saturday from 10 am to 12 noon, supervised by the paternal grandmother at her home, commencing on 23 July 2011. Additionally, once CCS services became available, the father would spend a further two hours each alternate weekend with B, supervised at the CCS, to ensure weekly contact. All handovers were to occur at the CCS or, if unavailable, at the C Town Police Station. The Independent Children’s Lawyer was directed to obtain a report from the CCS regarding the supervised time. The court was satisfied that the paternal grandmother understood her supervisory role and her obligation to the child's safety.