LING & GLAZIER

In the Family Court of Australia, Justice Johns considered a dispute between a mother and father concerning final parenting orders and child support. The mother sought sole parental responsibility for the child and a significant reduction in the father's time with the child, alleging the father posed a risk of physical and psychological harm and had failed to act protectively while the child was in his care. Conversely, the father sought an increase in his time with the child.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the mother sole parental responsibility, whether to reduce the father's time with the child, and whether to vary an order for non-periodic child support. A key consideration was the child's expressed wishes regarding their time with the father, which indicated a desire not to reduce that time. The court also had to assess the alleged risks posed by the father and the extent to which these risks impacted the child's best interests.

Justice Johns found that it was not in the child's best interests for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility. The court concluded that the father had failed to act protectively and that while the risk to the child posed by the father was minimised during daytime contact, the father's overnight time with the child should be reduced. Consequently, the court ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility and reduced the father's overnight time with the child. The decision also addressed the variation of the non-periodic child support order.