KELLER & CAVETT

In the matter of KELLER & CAVETT, heard before Judge Scarlett, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for the child X. The court was required to determine the orders relating to the child's residence, time spent with each parent, and various ancillary matters aimed at ensuring the child's welfare and addressing parental conduct.

The court was tasked with establishing a framework for shared parental responsibility, defining the specific times each parent would spend with the child, and implementing measures to monitor parental behaviour, particularly concerning drug and alcohol use. Key issues included the child's primary residence, the nature and frequency of contact for the non-resident parent, and the communication protocols between the parents. Furthermore, the court needed to address the involvement of the Independent Children's Lawyer and the necessity of professional assessments regarding parental capacity and drug and alcohol risk.

The court discharged all earlier parenting orders and made new orders for equal shared parental responsibility. The child X was to reside with the Father, contingent on his continued residence with his parents. Specific time arrangements were detailed for the Mother, including weekend and holiday periods, with a defined handover process at a public location. The orders also mandated telephone contact between parents and the child, prohibited contact with a specific individual (Mr L) during the Mother's time with X, and imposed restrictions on illicit drug use for both parties. Both parents were ordered to undergo urinalysis and CDT testing as requested by the Independent Children's Lawyer, and to provide evidence of completing parenting courses. Comprehensive information sharing between parents was mandated, with a communication book to be used for non-emergency matters. Finally, the court ordered a family consultant's report under section 62G of the Family Law Act 1975, to assess matters relevant to the child's welfare, including the involvement of paternal grandparents and any other proposed individuals for long-term care, and contemplated the appointment of a single expert on drug and alcohol risk issues if the parties could fund such an assessment.