MONCREIFFE & LAXTON

In *Moncreiffe & Laxton*, Austin J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications concerning the parental responsibility and living arrangements for three children, W Moncreiffe, J Moncreiffe, and K Laxton. The dispute arose in the context of family violence orders already in place against the respondent father for the protection of the applicant mother. The father had a history of drug and alcohol abuse and had recently been admitted to a psychiatric facility following an attempted suicide.

The court was required to determine, among other things, whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility applied to the children, and if not, to whom sole parental responsibility should be allocated. The court also had to consider the best interests of the children, including their relationships with each parent, and whether to make orders regarding the children living with one parent and restraining communication or contact with the other.

Austin J reasoned that equal shared parental responsibility could not be allocated for the two eldest children, W and J, as the respondent was not their biological father and their biological father was deceased. For the youngest child, K, the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was displaced due to the abuse and family violence committed by the respondent. The court found that the relationships between the respondent and the eldest two children were not to be taken into consideration under s 60CC(2)(a) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) because he was not their biological father. Furthermore, the relationship between the respondent and the youngest child was not considered meaningful. The court found that the children had meaningful relationships with the applicant mother.

Consequently, the court ordered that the applicant mother have sole parental responsibility for all three children, and that the children live with the mother. The parties were restrained from causing or permitting the children to spend time or communicate with the respondent father. The father was also restrained from approaching within 100 metres of the mother's residence or any school attended by the children. The court also directed that copies of the orders and reasons be forwarded to the NSW Department of Family and Community Services.