Martyn & Thompson

In *Martyn & Thompson*, heard by Benjamin J, the court considered parenting orders concerning a child born in December 2001. The dispute involved the mother and father, with the mother alleging controlling behaviour, verbal abuse, and isolation from her family by the father. The court also had to consider the father's history of breaching previous orders, including retaining the child without prior arrangement, and a conviction for common assault and breaching a family violence order.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to discharge previous parenting orders, whether the mother should have sole parental responsibility, with whom the child should live, and the nature and extent of the father's time with the child, including whether it should be supervised. The court was also required to assess the credit of the parties, particularly the father, whose evidence was found to be untruthful in parts.

Benjamin J found that some of the father's evidence was not truthful, and where there was a conflict, the mother's evidence was generally preferred, though with some reservations regarding the mother's evidence. The court accepted the mother's evidence of the father's controlling and verbally abusive behaviour, his attempts to isolate her, and his breaches of previous orders. The court also accepted the mother's evidence of ongoing verbal abuse during contact changes and the father's actions leading to a conviction for common assault and a restraint order.

Consequently, the court discharged all previous parenting orders. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility and the child was ordered to live with her. The father was to have supervised time with the child at a contact centre, subject to the parties arranging assessments and complying with the centre's rules and recommendations. The father was also ordered to meet the costs of the contact centre and a Dr W, who was to be consulted regarding the child's future time and communication with the father. The orders also stipulated a process for resolving future disagreements about contact arrangements, involving consultation with Dr W and potentially a Family Relationship Centre, before further court proceedings could be commenced.