Mason & McGregor

This case involved applications by the husband and wife concerning parenting arrangements for their son, born in December 2001, and the division of their property. The proceedings were heard by Cronin J in the Family Court of Australia. The dispute was marked by significant animosity between the parties, including findings of family violence by the husband against the wife, and a history of acrimonious interactions, some of which occurred in the presence of the child.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child in relation to parenting orders, specifically addressing the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under s 61DA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved considering whether the presumption should be rebutted due to family violence or if it would otherwise not be in the child's best interests. The court also had to resolve the division of the parties' property pool, taking into account their initial contributions, contributions during the relationship, and various other factors under s 75(2) of the Act.

Cronin J found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to the husband's engagement in family violence, as defined in s 4 of the Act. The court also determined that an equal shared parental responsibility arrangement would not be in the child's best interests, considering the extensive list of factors under s 60CC, including the parties' inability to communicate effectively, the history of violence, and the wife's reservations about the husband's behaviour with the child. In relation to property, the court calculated the net asset pool and, after assessing the parties' contributions and applying s 75(2) factors, ordered the husband to pay the wife a sum of $210,000 as a property settlement. The final orders discharged previous parenting orders and established a new parenting schedule, along with specific property division arrangements.