Mertens and Mertens

In *Mertens and Mertens*, heard by Judge Terry, the dispute concerned parenting orders for a child, [M], born in 2009. The court was required to determine the living arrangements for the child, the allocation of parental responsibility, the extent of the father's time and contact with the child, and protective measures for both the child and the mother.

The court's reasoning centred on the paramount consideration of the child's best interests, specifically balancing the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents against the need to protect the child from abuse, neglect, or family violence. The judge found that the second primary consideration was not relevant to the immediate issues. However, the first consideration, the benefit of a meaningful relationship, was central. The court noted that the child had seen her father only once in the preceding three and a half years, making the re-establishment of a significant and valuable relationship unlikely, even with increased supervised time. The father's affidavit, focusing on perceived unfairness and criticism of the mother, did not inspire confidence in his ability to reconnect with the child. Furthermore, the court identified a high risk of the father continuing to harass the mother, which would negatively impact the child's well-being and enjoyment of any contact.

Consequently, the court ordered that the child live with the mother and that the mother have sole parental responsibility. The father was ordered to spend no time with the child and to have no contact or communication with her, with specific prohibitions against indirect communication. Protective orders were made, restraining the father from approaching the mother's residence, the child's school, or the mother and child themselves. The mother was restrained from denigrating the father or discussing the proceedings in the child's presence. The mother was also permitted to provide school reports and photograph order forms to the father at his expense, and to provide copies of the orders to schools and employers. The Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged upon the expiry of any appeal period.