Painter and Morley

Benjamin J of the Federal Magistrates Court considered parenting orders concerning four children: A, S, L, and C. The dispute arose from the parents' prolonged and acrimonious litigation since their separation in 1999. The mother had remarried, and the father harboured concerns about her new husband's influence on the children. A significant issue was the children's living arrangements, with S and L having moved from the mother's care to the father's in June 2005, a transition surrounded by dispute. Communication between the parents was described as "poisonous," and the court noted the children had lived "in the shadow of litigation" for much of their lives.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in light of the history of conflict, the parents' respective capacities to provide for their needs, and the practical difficulties and expenses associated with maintaining the children's relationships with both parents. Specifically, the court had to consider the impact of any changes to the children's circumstances, the practicalities of travel and communication, and the maturity, sex, lifestyle, and background of the children and their parents. The court also had to address the father's concerns regarding the mother's husband, which had been previously addressed by Coleman J in 2001.

Benjamin J reasoned that the mother's years of conflict had diminished her ability to foster the children's relationship with the father, although she was better able to facilitate it than he was. The court found the mother's fears regarding the father's immersion of the children in conflict to be justified. The proposed orders aimed to avoid significant changes to the children's existing relationships with their parents, with the mother continuing her primary role for the younger children, but with significant time also spent with the father. The court acknowledged the geographical distance between the parents and the transport difficulties, attributing some of these to the father's working hours and limited resources, while inferring the mother had better financial resources. The court considered a shopping centre as a suitable changeover point for the children.

The court ordered that the parenting orders made on 5 February 2001 and subsequent orders be vacated. It further ordered that both the mother and the father have parental responsibility for each of the children A, S, L, and C.