KEITA & MAALOUF

In the matter of *Keita & Maalouf*, heard before Judge Altobelli, the dispute concerned interim parenting arrangements for a child. The proceedings involved allegations of family violence and mental health issues, necessitating an evaluation of the evidence presented by the parties.

The court was required to determine the nature of the evidence necessary to make findings regarding family violence and whether such findings were essential to rebut the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under section 61DA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). A key issue was whether inferences could be drawn from the evidence to satisfy these requirements, and if so, the nature of those inferences.

Judge Altobelli reasoned that while direct findings of family violence are not always necessary at the interim stage, the court must be satisfied that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility is rebutted. The court considered that the evidence, including allegations of family violence and mental health concerns, could support inferences that would lead to this conclusion. Consequently, the court made orders granting the mother sole parental responsibility and that the child live with her. The father's time with the child was to be supervised by a contact centre, with a staged progression towards unsupervised contact over several months, subject to the contact centre's assessment and recommendations.