Morrissey and Morrissey (No. 2)

This matter came before Cronin J concerning parenting applications between the parties, Morrissey and Morrissey. The dispute involved complex issues relating to the children's welfare and the parents' capacities to care for them.

The court was required to determine several key issues, including the necessity and funding of psychiatric assessments for both parents, the arrangements for the final hearing of the parenting applications, and the specific content and filing deadlines for affidavits from each party. Further, the court needed to address the attendance of a family consultant at the final hearing and the practical arrangements for the husband's time with the child J, including specific changeover locations and times. The court also considered amendments to previous orders concerning the child's surname and the implications for the Australian Federal Police Airport Watch List.

Cronin J's reasoning focused on ensuring a thorough and fair determination of the parenting matters, prioritising the children's best interests. The court applied principles of procedural fairness by setting clear deadlines for the filing of evidence and outlining the scope of permissible affidavit material, particularly concerning equal shared parental responsibility and historical matters of family violence. The court also made specific orders regarding the attendance of professionals and the practicalities of the child's time with each parent, including directions to the Independent Children's Lawyer and provisions for funding of assessments. The court also addressed the need for accurate record-keeping and communication with law enforcement agencies.

The court made a series of orders, including the adjournment of extant applications, provisions for seeking recovery orders if the wife failed to comply with previous orders, and the continuation of the final hearing for parenting applications in January 2009. Specific directions were given for psychiatric assessments, the filing of affidavits, and the attendance of the family consultant. The court also made detailed orders regarding the husband's time with the child J, including specific changeover arrangements and a direction that the child not be left in the sole care of Ms B. Finally, the court ordered that previous orders be amended to include the surname "WE" and that the Australian Federal Police be notified to amend the Airport Watch List accordingly.