LOMBARDI & HIGGINS

In the matter of *Lombardi & Higgins*, Tree J of the Family Court of Australia considered interim parenting arrangements for a child. The dispute arose between the parents following the breakdown of their relationship, with a previous parenting plan in place. The mother sought orders for supervised time with the father, citing a verbally abusive incident at Christmas and a Temporary Protection Order that restricted the father's contact. The father, who had not spent time with the child for five months, sought to re-establish a meaningful relationship.

The court was required to determine the interim living and spending time arrangements for the child, considering the best interests of the child. Key issues included whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility applied, given the parties' communication difficulties and their agreement to await a family report. The court also had to assess the alleged emotional risks posed by each parent to the child and determine the appropriate level of supervision for any time spent between the child and the father.

Tree J reasoned that making definitive findings of fact on the contentious issues was not possible on an interim basis. While acknowledging the importance of the child maintaining a meaningful relationship with her father, the court rejected the mother's suggestion of contact centre supervision. Instead, the court ordered a graduated increase in the father's time with the child, commencing with a familiar supportive adult present, and ultimately aiming to return to the previous parenting plan arrangements. The presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was not applied, as both parties agreed to defer this issue pending a family report, and their current communication skills were deemed insufficient for joint decision-making.

The court made orders for the child to live with the mother and spend time with the father, with a detailed schedule of graduated time commencing immediately and increasing over subsequent weeks. These orders included specific provisions for holidays, special occasions, and telephone communication. Furthermore, the court issued injunctions restraining both parents from excessive physical force, excessive alcohol consumption in the child's presence, use of prohibited drugs, exceeding prescribed drug dosages, and denigrating the other parent. The parties were also ordered to participate in parenting courses and to jointly appoint an expert to prepare a family report.