Leicester and Blackett & Anor

This matter concerned an application by the father for a review of decisions made by the Principal Registrar concerning parenting orders for the child, B. The dispute involved the discharge of orders suspending contact with the father, an increase in the child's time with the father, the child's attendance at a different high school, and the continuation of psychological counselling. Highly disputed evidence existed regarding the father's conduct towards the maternal grandparents, and the child had expressed his views during counselling. The maternal grandparents had also filed an application for parenting orders.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. These included whether the father's application for a de novo hearing was appropriate, the standing of the maternal grandparents to bring an application for parenting orders given the death of one parent and the absence of existing orders, and the admissibility of reports from the child's psychologist under section 102A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court also considered whether the father's argument regarding the constitutional validity of a previous section of the Act, referencing the High Court's decision in *Vitzdamm-Jones*, should be summarily dismissed.

Forrest J reasoned that the Principal Registrar's decision to suspend contact was appropriate given the evidence of the father's conduct towards the maternal grandparents and the child's expressed views. The court found that the maternal grandparents had standing to apply for parenting orders. Regarding the admissibility of the psychologist's reports, the court exercised its discretion to admit the evidence, finding it relevant and not falling within the exclusionary provisions of section 102A. The court ultimately discharged the order suspending contact, but maintained the child's attendance with the psychologist, with the psychologist having sole discretion over adult involvement in the counselling process.

The court ordered that paragraph 4 of the Principal Registrar's parenting order be discharged. It further ordered that, notwithstanding previous equal shared parental responsibility orders, the maternal grandparents could continue to take the child to therapeutic counselling with Mr C, who would solely determine the involvement of other adults in the process. All other outstanding interim applications were dismissed.