PADLEY & PADLEY

In the matter of *Padley & Padley*, Judge Scarlett of the Family Court of Australia considered applications for interim parenting orders concerning a two-year-old child. The proceedings involved allegations of mental health issues and the father's request for unsupervised time with the child. The court also addressed the desirability of seeking interim orders that mirrored final orders and the relevance of historical psychiatric treatment.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the father's time with the child should be supervised due to an alleged unacceptable risk, whether the child's name should be placed on the Family Law Watch List, and whether an injunction was necessary to prevent the child's removal from Australia. The court also had to determine the relevance of psychiatric treatment from 2006 to proceedings in 2015 and the appropriateness of "cut and paste" pleadings for interim orders.

Judge Scarlett determined that there was no evidence to support placing the child on the Family Law Watch List or issuing an injunction to prevent removal from Australia, as there was no Australian passport or evidence of risk. The court found that psychiatric treatment from 2006 was not relevant to the current proceedings in 2015. The court ordered equal shared parental responsibility, with the child to live with the mother and the father to have specified supervised or agreed time with the child. The father was also ordered to comply with medical directions.

Crucially, the court ordered that the child's interests be independently represented by a lawyer appointed under section 68L of the *Family Law Act 1975*, with Legal Aid New South Wales requested to arrange this representation. The parties were directed to provide all relevant documents to the appointed Independent Children's Lawyer.