LONCAR & CODY

In the matter of *Loncar & Cody*, Hannam J of the Family Court of Australia considered an undefended parenting application concerning the child X. The respondent mother had discontinued her application for final orders, while the father had failed to comply with trial directions and did not attend the undefended hearing. The Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL) proposed orders for the father to have sole parental responsibility for the child, that the child live with him, and spend time with the mother as agreed, given concerns about risks of physical and psychological harm in the mother's care.

The central legal issues before the court were how to best promote the child's welfare and best interests in circumstances where the mother had withdrawn her application and the father had failed to engage with the court process, and what orders were appropriate to address the identified risks to the child. The court was required to determine the most suitable parenting arrangements, considering the ICL's recommendations and the limited information available due to the father's non-compliance.

Hannam J applied the paramount principle of the child's welfare and best interests. The court accepted the ICL's submissions and made orders largely in accordance with their proposal, reflecting the court's assessment of the risks associated with the mother's care. The orders discharged previous parenting arrangements, stipulated that the child live with the father and that the father have sole parental responsibility. The child was to spend time with the mother as agreed between the parties, with consideration for the child's wishes, and have liberal electronic communication. The court also imposed specific prohibitions on both parents regarding denigration, physical discipline, illicit substances, and alcohol consumption in the child's presence.