Pelham & Jupp (No. 2)

In the matter of *Pelham & Jupp (No. 2)*, Berman J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father (Mr Jupp) seeking to resume spending time with his children, X and Y. The mother (Ms Pelham) opposed any contact, citing allegations of sexual abuse against the father, which were the subject of ongoing criminal investigations. An Independent Children’s Lawyer was appointed to represent the children's interests.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in circumstances involving serious allegations and criminal investigations concerning the father. This involved balancing the children's need to maintain a relationship with their father against the potential risks to their safety and well-being. A further issue was whether one of the children should continue to receive therapeutic support, notwithstanding an existing agreement between the parties to restrain from taking the children to health professionals without mutual consent.

Berman J adopted a cautious approach, acknowledging the need for a careful balance between the children's relationship with their father and their protection. The court applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) concerning the best interests of the child, considering the report prepared pursuant to section 65L. The court found that the evidence supported the ongoing advantage of therapeutic support for one of the children.

Consequently, the court made orders for supervised time between the father and the children, with specific arrangements for handovers and the duration of contact. An injunction was granted, restraining either parent from taking the children to most health professionals without the other's consent, with specific exceptions for general practitioners, a named speech therapist, occupational therapists, medical emergencies, and Child Protection Services. The court also set out detailed procedural directions for the filing of evidence and financial statements by both parties and the Independent Children’s Lawyer, and scheduled further steps towards trial. Liberty was granted to relist the matter regarding interim parenting arrangements upon determination of the criminal investigation.