LANGDON & WATERHOUSE

In the Family Court of Australia, Johns J presided over proceedings between a mother and a father concerning their two children. The dispute arose from the father's non-participation and non-compliance with previous court orders, his residence in a foreign country (Country D) where prior Hague proceedings had occurred, and a declaration that he had wrongfully retained the children from Australia. The children had been in the mother's sole care since their return to Australia in December 2016, and the father had not spent time with them since that date, nor complied with interim orders for time. The mother sought supervised time with the father in Australia and a reduction in the frequency of their Skype communication, citing instances of inappropriate behaviour and abuse by the father during these calls.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children regarding their relationship with their father, specifically concerning parental responsibility, the nature and frequency of communication, and the conditions under which any future time together in Australia would occur. Additionally, the court had to consider the mother's application for costs.

Johns J reasoned that it was not in the children's best interests to have equal shared parental responsibility, given the father's history of non-compliance and his residence abroad. Consequently, the mother was granted sole parental responsibility, with a requirement to notify the father of proposed long-term decisions and consider his response. The father was permitted limited weekly Skype communication, subject to conditions to prevent discussion of sensitive matters. Any future time spent with the children in Australia was to be supervised, with the father liable for the costs. The father was also restrained from discussing specific matters with the children, denigrating the mother, or questioning the children about abuse allegations. The court also made orders regarding passports, travel, and notification of medical issues, and addressed the mother's costs application.