Khoury & Ganem

In the matter of SYC 6380 of 2011, Mr Khoury (the Father) and Ms Ganem (the Mother) were before the Court concerning parenting orders for their child, X. The Independent Children’s Lawyer sought orders consistent with the Mother’s proposals, including a restraint on the Father attending X’s school. The dispute centred on the appropriate living arrangements and time X should spend with each parent, given a history of domestic violence allegations, separation, and X's expressed fears of her Father.

The Court was required to determine the best interests of X, specifically whether to discharge existing parenting orders, grant the Mother sole parental responsibility, and establish X's living arrangements and communication with the Father. Key legal issues included assessing the impact of any changes on X's circumstances, the practical difficulties and expense of X spending time with the Father, the capacity of each parent to meet X's needs, and X's maturity, sex, lifestyle, and background, all within the framework of section 60CC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

Justice Bender reasoned that X, aged 10, had lived in the Mother's primary care since birth and had minimal, if any, meaningful contact with the Father for several years. The Court found that X’s anxieties and fears regarding her Father were likely those of the Mother, which X had internalised. The Court noted that X’s enmeshment with her Mother and her own anxieties required therapeutic intervention to foster resilience and independence. While the Father denied allegations of violence and controlling behaviour, attributing X's reluctance to his own cultural background and the Mother's alleged parental alienation, the Court found his fixation on these issues and lack of empathy for X's emotional needs raised concerns about his capacity to prioritise X's needs.

The Court ordered that the parenting orders made on 14 June 2014 be discharged, with the exception of the Watch List Order. The Mother was granted sole parental responsibility for X, and X was to live with the Mother. X was to spend no time or communicate with the Father, except in accordance with X’s wishes. The Father was restrained by injunction from attending within 500 metres of any school X attended. The Mother was directed to obtain therapeutic counselling for X, and the Father was permitted to write a letter to X, subject to the Independent Children’s Lawyer's approval. The Independent Children’s Lawyer was requested to explain the orders to X and remain involved for a further three months to assist with compliance and counselling arrangements.