MACNEIL & DANE

This case concerned an application by the mother to relocate with the child to New Zealand, which was opposed by the father. The court was required to determine the best interests of the child in light of the proposed relocation and the existing family dynamics.

The legal issues before the court included whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility applied, given the father's commission of family violence, and how to best ensure the child's welfare and development. The court also had to consider the child's secure attachment to the mother, the developing relationship with the father, and the potential risks posed by the father's exposure of the child to family violence.

Austin J found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility did not apply due to the father's family violence, and that sole parental responsibility for the child should be with the mother. The court reasoned that while the father posed some risk of psychological harm, it was not unacceptably high and could be minimised. The evidence favoured the mother's ability to relocate the child, but only after the child and father had a reasonable period to consolidate their relationship. The court ordered that the child live with the mother, who was granted sole parental responsibility. The mother was restrained from relocating the child outside of Australia until 31 March 2016, with specific timeframes and conditions for the child to spend time with the father, including restrictions on the father's alcohol consumption during those times. From 1 April 2016, the mother was permitted to take or send the child from Australia, with detailed provisions for the child's time with the father thereafter, depending on his proximity. The court also made orders for communication between the child and each parent, and for the provision of school reports to the father.