MORTENSEN-HEALY & HEALY

The case of *Mortensen-Healy & Healy* concerned parenting and property settlement disputes between a mother and father regarding their two children. The children resided with the father, and the mother had limited, supervised contact with them, occurring only a few times annually. The mother had also made unfounded allegations of family violence and child abuse against the father. The court was required to determine the children's living arrangements and the extent of parental responsibility, as well as to divide the parties' matrimonial assets.

The court was required to determine the appropriate parenting orders, specifically whether to continue the father's sole parental responsibility and the children's residence with him, given the mother's history of posing an unacceptable risk of harm and her inability to meet the children's emotional needs. The court also had to address the division of the parties' property pool, considering their respective contributions and the significant future care responsibilities of the father. The court also considered and dismissed the mother's application for an adjournment.

Austin J found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted by the parties' failure to communicate. The court ordered that the father have sole parental responsibility and that the children live with him. Contact between the mother and children was significantly restricted to four supervised three-hour sessions annually, with specific provisions for supervision and venue. Telephone contact and written communication were also ordered, with the mother restrained from any other contact or approach to the children or their schools. In relation to property, the court ordered that the father receive 85% of the matrimonial asset pool and the mother 15%. This adjustment in favour of the father was primarily due to his significant financial contributions at the commencement of the relationship, his post-separation contributions to the welfare of the family, and crucially, his future care of the children. The mother was ordered to pay the father a sum of $50,695, and the father was declared the sole owner of the matrimonial home, subject to his payment to the mother. The court also ordered the father to indemnify the mother against certain debts.