Manrow & Manrow

In the matter of *Manrow & Manrow*, Rees J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application concerning the parenting arrangements for a child, J. The dispute centred on the appropriate arrangements for J to spend time with his parents, Ms Manrow (the applicant mother) and Mr Manrow (the respondent father), and the allocation of parental responsibility.

The primary legal issue before the court was to determine parenting orders that would best serve J's interests, particularly in light of his expressed wishes regarding time spent with each parent. This involved considering the meaning and application of the principle that children should have a meaningful relationship with both parents, as outlined in the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), and how to balance this with the child's autonomy and preferences. The court also had to assess the father's evolving position regarding parenting arrangements and the potential consequences of imposing a regime that might be unacceptable to J.

Rees J reasoned that it was not in J's best interests to make prescriptive orders for equal time with each parent, given J's age and consistently expressed wishes to have freedom in choosing how much time he spends with his father and under what circumstances. The court placed significant weight on J's views, as advised by the Family Consultant, and noted the potential for further applications and non-compliance if J were subjected to a regime he found unacceptable. The court adopted the mother's proposed orders, which allowed J to live with each parent according to his wishes during school terms and holidays, while granting the mother sole parental responsibility for education and otherwise maintaining equal shared parental responsibility. The court also ordered costs against both parents in favour of Legal Aid NSW.