King and King

In *King & King*, the Family Court of Australia considered an interim application by the husband, Mr M King, for parenting orders concerning his three children, C, D, and E. The wife, Ms King, was the respondent. The husband, representing himself, sought various orders including injunctions preventing the children's removal from Australia, equal shared parental responsibility for two of the children, specific time arrangements, and an injunction against denigration. The wife sought sole parental responsibility, supervised contact, and enforcement of spousal maintenance. An Independent Children’s Lawyer also participated in the proceedings.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether to grant the husband's interim parenting orders, the wife's interim parenting orders, and ancillary orders relating to financial disclosure and personal property. Specifically, the Court had to determine the appropriate interim arrangements for the children, given the breakdown of previous contact centre orders and the children's strong resistance to contact with the husband. The Court also considered the husband's application for disclosure of Turkish property assets and the wife's response, as well as the husband's claim for personal items.

Justice Cronin noted that the case had a significant history and that the previous contact centre arrangements had failed, with the centre declining to continue due to the children's distress. The Court found the evidence of the husband's proposed supervisors to be of no value, highlighting their lack of understanding of the role and their limited contact with the children. Regarding financial matters, the Court dismissed the husband's application to discharge spousal maintenance due to insufficient evidence of changed circumstances and found no basis for interim orders regarding personal items. However, the Court ordered the wife to provide disclosure of documents relating to her Turkish property interests, emphasising the absolute duty of disclosure under the Family Law Rules.

Ultimately, the Court dismissed the husband's interim application and the wife's response, finding that a trial where evidence could be properly tested was necessary. The Court ordered injunctions restraining the removal of the children from Australia and requiring the wife to disclose documents concerning her Turkish properties. All extant applications for final orders were listed for a final hearing, with parties directed to file amended applications and responses detailing their precise orders sought.