Murphy & Murphy

Case

[2007] FamCA 795

20 July 2007


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Murphy & Murphy [2007] FamCA 795 [2007] FamCA 795 20 July 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involved an application by the father for equal shared parental responsibility and parenting time, and by the mother for supervised contact, based on allegations of child sexual abuse. The parties separated in 2005, with two children of the marriage, A (aged 5 ½) and T (aged 3 ½), remaining with the mother. Allegations of sexual abuse by the father against the two older daughters from the mother's previous relationships, M (aged 13 ½) and A, arose from statements made by the children. The father consistently denied these allegations.

The court was required to determine the standard of proof for allegations of child sexual abuse in parenting proceedings, the assessment of "unacceptable risk" of harm, and the admissibility of extrinsic information from non-legal sources. It also needed to consider the importance of the parental relationship and maintaining contact, the best interests of the children, and the circumstances under which parenting time might be restricted or denied. The court also had to assess the appropriateness of long-term supervised contact and post-order reviews, and whether alleged child victims should give direct evidence.

Carmody J found that the totality of the evidence was insufficient to make definite findings on past sexual abuse. However, the possibility of past sexual abuse could not be dismissed, giving rise to an appreciable, though relatively low, risk of sex-related harm to A on unsupervised time with the father. No assessed risk was found in relation to T. Considering the child protection concerns, the mother's adverse attitude towards contact, and other factors, the court determined that it was not in the best interests of the children to make final orders. The court concluded that a graduated re-introduction of unsupervised time with safeguards, including a short period of supervised contact and post-order monitoring, was the best interests solution. No orders were made re-allocating parental responsibility due to high levels of mutual suspicion and conflict between the parents.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Evidence

  • Negligence & Tort

Legal Concepts

  • Damages

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

31

SIEGERT & PARKER [2019] FamCA 480
Eicher and Roman [2010] FamCA 777
WHELDON & DINH [2010] FamCA 740
Cases Cited

10

Statutory Material Cited

95

Norbis v Norbis [1986] HCA 17
Norbis v Norbis [1986] HCA 17
W & R [2006] FamCA 25