Kerimowa & Chong
Case
•
[2025] FedCFamC1F 277
•1 May 2025
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Kerimowa & Chong [2025] FedCFamC1F 277
[2025] FedCFamC1F 277
1 May 2025
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Kerimowa v Chong, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) dealt with a dispute regarding the living arrangements and parental responsibilities of two children, a boy aged ten and a girl aged seven. The father sought sole parental responsibility for the children, arguing that the mother posed a significant risk of psychological harm due to her alleged psychological abuse. The Independent Children's Lawyer supported the father's application. Conversely, the mother initially promoted unsupervised time between the children and their father but later changed her position.
The court had to decide on several legal issues, including whether there was an unacceptable risk of psychological harm to the children if they spent time with their mother, and whether the mother's last-minute changes to her application and her subsequent attempts to adduce further evidence should be allowed. The court also had to consider the implications of the mother's alleged cognitive disability and her attempts to assert this in the proceedings.
The court found that there was indeed an unacceptable risk of psychological harm to the children if they spent unsupervised time with their mother. The court noted the mother's history of psychological abuse and her unwillingness to voluntarily facilitate contact between the children and their father. The mother's last-minute changes to her application and her attempts to adduce further evidence were not accepted by the court, which found her behaviour concerning and disruptive. The court granted the father sole parental responsibility and ordered that the children live with him, with limited and supervised contact with the mother. Additionally, the court issued an injunction restraining the mother from coming within 200 metres of the children’s residence, school, or any place where they were attending medical or allied health appointments.
The final orders of the court mandated that the father have sole parental responsibility for the children, that the children live with the father, and that the mother be restrained from spending time with the children or communicating with them for a period of six months. After this period, the children would spend time with the mother on supervised occasions. The court also ordered that the mother pay her share of the Independent Children’s Lawyer's costs.
The court had to decide on several legal issues, including whether there was an unacceptable risk of psychological harm to the children if they spent time with their mother, and whether the mother's last-minute changes to her application and her subsequent attempts to adduce further evidence should be allowed. The court also had to consider the implications of the mother's alleged cognitive disability and her attempts to assert this in the proceedings.
The court found that there was indeed an unacceptable risk of psychological harm to the children if they spent unsupervised time with their mother. The court noted the mother's history of psychological abuse and her unwillingness to voluntarily facilitate contact between the children and their father. The mother's last-minute changes to her application and her attempts to adduce further evidence were not accepted by the court, which found her behaviour concerning and disruptive. The court granted the father sole parental responsibility and ordered that the children live with him, with limited and supervised contact with the mother. Additionally, the court issued an injunction restraining the mother from coming within 200 metres of the children’s residence, school, or any place where they were attending medical or allied health appointments.
The final orders of the court mandated that the father have sole parental responsibility for the children, that the children live with the father, and that the mother be restrained from spending time with the children or communicating with them for a period of six months. After this period, the children would spend time with the mother on supervised occasions. The court also ordered that the mother pay her share of the Independent Children’s Lawyer's costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Parenting
-
Supervised Visitation
-
Restraining Order
-
Injunction
-
Sole Parental Responsibility
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Kerimowa & Chong [2025] FedCFamC1F 277
Most Recent Citation
Kerimowa & Chong (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 395
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Chong & Kerimowa
[2025] FedCFamC1A 158
Kerimowa & Chong (No 2)
[2025] FedCFamC1F 395
Chong & Kerimowa
[2025] FedCFamC1A 158
Cases Cited
14
Statutory Material Cited
2
Briginshaw v Briginshaw
[1938] HCA 34
Briginshaw v Briginshaw
[1938] HCA 34
M v M
[1988] HCA 68