Messina & Obelink

In the matter of *Messina & Obelink*, heard by Williams J, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for a child. The mother, Ms Obelink, had unilaterally suspended the child's time with the father, Mr Messina, citing the Victorian COVID-19 lockdown as the reason. The father sought the resumption of his time with the child.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the mother had established that the child would be placed at risk in the father's care, thereby justifying her suspension of the existing parenting orders. The court was required to assess the evidence presented by the mother to determine if it met the threshold for such an intervention.

Williams J reasoned that the mother had failed to discharge her onus of proof in demonstrating that the child would be at risk if he spent time with the father. Consequently, the court found no basis to uphold the unilateral suspension of time. The legal principle applied was that a parent seeking to vary or suspend existing parenting orders due to risk must provide sufficient evidence to substantiate those claims.

Accordingly, the court ordered that the child resume time with his father on Friday, 24 July 2020, in accordance with the parenting orders made on 4 October 2019. All extant applications before the court were dismissed.