MAYSE & AMBER

In proceedings before Dawe J, the father failed to participate in the family law proceedings despite numerous attempts to facilitate his involvement. The court was therefore required to determine whether it was appropriate to proceed with the matter in his absence.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under section 61DA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) had been rebutted, and with whom the child should live, including whether the child should be permitted to relocate to the United States of America. The court considered the best interests of the child in determining these issues.

Dawe J reasoned that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to the child having been in the primary care of the mother for a lengthy period with limited fatherly input, and the practical difficulties in ensuring communication with the father. The court found that it was in the child's best interests to live with the mother and for the mother to have sole parental responsibility. The court was satisfied that the mother would continue to encourage an ongoing relationship between the father and child, and therefore permitted the child to relocate with the mother to the United States of America.

The court ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child, that the child live with the mother, and that the child be permitted to relocate with the mother to the United States of America. The mother was ordered to notify the father of all decisions regarding the child's long-term care, welfare, and development, and upon relocation, to provide her residential address and telephone contact details. The child was to spend time with and communicate with the father at all reasonable times as agreed. The child's passport was ordered to be released to the mother.