O’Laughlin and Akkad and Anor

This matter concerned parenting orders for a child born in 2015, brought before Benjamin J. The dispute involved the mother, Ms O’Laughlin, the father, Mr Akkad, and the paternal grandmother, Ms Jerez. The court was required to determine the arrangements for parental responsibility, the child's residence, and the time the child would spend with each parent and the paternal grandmother, as well as address various injunctions and the provision of information between the parties.

The court's reasoning focused on establishing a framework for the child's care and contact, with a significant emphasis on the paternal grandmother's role. Equal shared parental responsibility was ordered between the mother and the paternal grandmother, with the grandmother tasked with keeping the father informed of decisions concerning the child, though not bound by his views. The child was ordered to live with the paternal grandmother, with specific provisions for the child's time with the father, which was to be agreed between the father and the paternal grandmother, subject to certain limitations. Detailed arrangements were set out for the child's time with the mother, contingent on whether she resided in Melbourne or Sydney from 2020 onwards, including provisions for school terms, holidays, and specific dates.

In addition to the residence and time arrangements, the court made several orders to protect the child and the parties. These included injunctions restraining the father from approaching within specified distances of the mother and a particular McDonald's location during changeovers, and prohibitions against the father, mother, and paternal grandmother consuming drugs or alcohol while the child was in their care. Further injunctions prevented the parties from discussing their occupations with the child or abusing, demeaning, or belittling each other or family members in the child's presence. The mother was also restrained from bringing the child into contact with a Ms E. By consent, orders were made to prevent the child's removal from Australia without court permission, with the child to be placed on the Airport Watch List. The court also ordered the mother and father to each pay half of the costs of the Independent Children's Lawyer.