Nielsen and Springer (No 2)

In *Nielsen and Springer (No 2)*, the parties were the mother and father of two children. The dispute concerned final parenting orders made in September 2019 following a defended hearing. The mother had unilaterally relocated with the children to New South Wales, prompting the father to seek their return to their principal place of residence in Adelaide. The proceedings were heard by Mead J in the Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issues before the court were whether it was in the best interests of the children to re-litigate the parenting issues, and whether there had been a sufficient change in circumstances to satisfy the rule in *Rice v Asplund* [1979] FamCA 124; (1979) FLC 90-715. This rule generally requires a significant change in circumstances before final parenting orders can be revisited.

Mead J considered the application of the rule in *Rice v Asplund* in light of the mother's relocation. The court determined that the matter should be revisited, indicating that the threshold for re-litigation had been met. However, the court did not make final orders regarding the children's residence at this stage.

The court ordered that the father's interim application for the return of the children be dismissed. The matter was adjourned and listed for further directions on 2 February 2021, to determine the future progress of the parenting proceedings.