Little and Little and Ors

This case concerned orders relating to four children, B, C, D, and E, with the intervenors seeking sole parental responsibility and the children to live with them. The father had not participated meaningfully in the proceedings, and the mother sought to spend time with the children under certain conditions.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children, considering the existing living arrangements, the capacity of the parties to provide for the children's needs, and the likely effect of any changes in their circumstances. Specifically, the court had to assess the appropriateness of the intervenors having sole parental responsibility, the father's lack of involvement, and the conditions under which the mother could spend time with the children.

Johns J found that the intervenors had provided primary care for the children since December 2016 and had met their physical, emotional, and intellectual needs, with the children thriving in their care. Given the father's non-participation, the court saw little utility in making orders for him to spend time with the children. The court was satisfied that the arrangements proposed, which allowed the mother supervised time with the children contingent on completing a parenting course and providing drug screens, were in the children's best interests.

The court ordered the discharge of previous orders, granted the intervenors sole parental responsibility and the children's residence, and prohibited the father from spending any time with the children, though allowing for cards and gifts under strict supervision. Injunctions were put in place to protect the children, mother, and intervenors from the father. The mother was granted supervised time with the children, subject to conditions including a parenting course and drug screens, and restrictions on her use of alcohol and drugs during such time. The intervenors were ordered to keep the mother informed about the children, and the mother was similarly required to keep the intervenors informed. The mother was also restrained from denigrating the intervenors or discussing the proceedings with the children. The Independent Children's Lawyer was to explain the outcome to the children, after which their appointment would be discharged.