Malcolm and Pantelides

This case concerned a dispute between Ms Malcolm (the mother) and Mr Pantelides (the father) regarding parenting orders for their ten-year-old child, L. The mother sought permission to relocate with L to New Zealand, while the father opposed this move and proposed a shared care arrangement in Sydney, or alternatively, for the mother to remain in their current location in New South Wales and for L to continue spending school holidays with him in Sydney. The matter was heard in the Family Court of Australia by Forrest J.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to grant the mother's application for international relocation of the child to New Zealand, and consequently, what parenting orders were in the child's best interests, having regard to the principles and considerations outlined in sections 60B and 60CC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court was required to determine the most appropriate living arrangements and time arrangements between the parents, considering the child's welfare as the paramount consideration.

Forrest J determined that it was in L's best interests to permit the mother to relocate with her to New Zealand. The court reasoned that the mother would have greater family support and improved job opportunities in New Zealand, which would benefit L. The family consultant also recommended that the relocation be permitted. The court noted that the proposed arrangements would not significantly alter the time L currently spent with her father. The court made orders for equal shared parental responsibility, with L to live with the mother and be at liberty to relocate to New Zealand. Specific provisions were made for L to spend time with the father during school holidays and for regular communication between L and the father, including telephone and Skype contact. The father was ordered to be liable for the costs of L's flights between Australia and New Zealand.