KATTAN & CHATTAH

In the matter of Kattan & Chattah, Johnston J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting and property disputes between the mother and father of three children aged ten, eight, and six. The children had been living with both parents under an equal time arrangement. The father sought for the children to live with him, with alternate weekend time for the mother, while the mother and the Independent Children's Lawyer (ICL) sought for the children to live with the mother, with alternate weekend time for the father. The court also addressed the division of property and superannuation following the parties' eight-year marriage.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in light of findings of family violence and the parents' inability to shield the children from their conflict. Specifically, the court had to decide whether an equal time arrangement remained in the children's best interests, and if not, what alternative parenting orders would serve their welfare. In relation to property, the court needed to assess the parties' contributions and consider relevant factors under section 75(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to determine an equitable distribution of their assets and superannuation.

Johnston J found that the high level of conflict between the parents and their engagement in family violence meant that an equal time arrangement was not in the children's best interests. The court ordered that the children live with the mother and have sole parental responsibility, with provisions for regular time with the father, including alternate weekends and half of school holidays. The court also ordered that the former matrimonial home be sold by public auction, with the proceeds to be distributed after expenses and mortgage discharge, allocating 65.663 percent to the mother and 34.337 percent to the father. The father was declared the sole owner of his business, and each party was declared the sole owner of other property and superannuation in their possession. The court also made orders restraining the removal of the children from Australia and placed their names on a Watch List. The application for costs by the ICL was dismissed.