Menendez & Willmore

In the matter of *Menendez & Willmore*, heard by Carew J, the court considered allegations of child abuse made by the mother against the father. The central dispute revolved around the living arrangements and time spent between the child and each parent, with the mother alleging sexual abuse by the father. However, the court found that the father did not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the child. Instead, the court determined that the mother had intentionally manipulated evidence and fabricated allegations of sexual abuse with the aim of negatively impacting the father's relationship with their child. The court concluded that these actions by the mother constituted a risk of psychological and emotional abuse to the child.

The legal issues before the court were primarily concerned with the best interests of the child, specifically in relation to where the child should live and with whom the child should spend time. The court was required to assess the risks posed by each parent to the child's welfare, including the risk of emotional and psychological harm. A key consideration was whether the mother's conduct created an unacceptable risk of harm to the child, warranting a change in the child's primary residence. The court also had to balance the potential harm to the child from ongoing supervision against the risk of compromising the child's relationship with the mother.

Carew J reasoned that the mother's deliberate manipulation of evidence and false allegations of sexual abuse presented a significant risk of psychological and emotional harm to the child. Consequently, the court determined that it was in the child's best interests for the child to live with the father. The court applied the paramount consideration of the child's best interests in making its orders. The court also considered the risk of the child's relationship with the mother being compromised by the constraints of ongoing supervision, concluding that a gradual increase in the mother's time with the child, initially supervised, would be appropriate.

The court ordered that the father shall have sole parental responsibility for the child. The child shall live with the father, who will inform the mother of significant decisions and consider her written response before making them. The mother's time with the child will be supervised for an initial period of three months, with a gradual increase in duration and frequency thereafter, including supervised video calls. The mother is also restrained from attending the child's school except for specific events and must provide any passports for the child to the father. The father is permitted to take the child overseas from July 2022, with provisions for make-up time for the mother.