Mooney and Landis

In the Family Court of Australia, Judge Burchardt considered a dispute between the parents of a child, [X], concerning parenting arrangements. The proceedings involved an application for final parenting orders, which were to operate notwithstanding an interim intervention order made by the Magistrates Court of Town A.

The court was required to determine the nature and extent of the parental responsibility to be shared by the mother and father, and to establish specific arrangements for the child's time with each parent. Additionally, the court needed to address orders concerning communication between the child and the father, changeover procedures, and prohibitions against denigration and discussion of proceedings in the child's presence. The court also considered orders relating to substance use by the father and alcohol consumption by both parents, as well as the father's attendance at gigs with the child. Finally, the court had to consider the interaction of its orders with the existing Magistrates Court intervention order.

The court made orders for equal shared parental responsibility, detailing specific time arrangements for the child with the father, including alternate weekends and half of school holidays, along with scheduled telephone contact. Injunctions were granted to prevent denigration of a parent and discussion of proceedings in the child's hearing. Further orders prohibited the father from consuming cannabis in the child's presence and attending gigs with the child until a specified age, and restrained both parents from excessive alcohol consumption while the child was in their care. The court explicitly noted that its orders were inconsistent with the Magistrates Court intervention order, particularly regarding telephone communication and changeovers, and that its orders would operate notwithstanding the intervention order pursuant to section 68P of the *Family Law Act 1975*. Copies of the Family Court orders were to be provided to relevant authorities.