PENGLETON & FARAM

In *Pengleton & Faram*, heard by Judge Howard, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for a child, specifically relating to a school issue that amounted to a relocation. The court was tasked with determining the best interests of the child in light of the parents' differing proposals for the child's primary residence.

The court was required to consider the provisions of section 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), which outlines the factors a court must take into account when determining a child's best interests. This involved assessing both the primary considerations, namely the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents, and a range of additional considerations, including the child's expressed preferences (though given little weight due to the child's young age), the child's relationship with extended family and siblings, the parents' ability to make joint decisions, the child's existing living arrangements, the practicalities of maintaining relationships, and each parent's capacity to provide for the child's needs.

Judge Howard's reasoning focused on applying the various subsections of section 60CC to the facts of the case. The court found that the child had a loving and meaningful relationship with both parents, and there was no evidence of harm or neglect. While the child expressed a preference to live with the mother, this was discounted due to the child's age. Significant weight was given to the child's close relationships with her maternal grandparents and her sibling, who lived in Town C, the mother's current location. The court noted that moving the child to Suburb B, the father's location, would constitute a significant change and reduce contact with her maternal family. The practical difficulties and expenses associated with the parents living an hour and forty minutes apart were also acknowledged. Ultimately, the court found that both parents were capable of meeting the child's emotional and intellectual needs and had demonstrated a positive attitude towards their parental responsibilities.

The court made orders requiring the parties to exchange proposed Final Orders by specific dates, with a view to reaching an agreed position. If agreement could not be reached, the parties were to submit their proposed wording to the court. The court indicated it would then issue a Final Order from Chambers or relist the matter for mention to finalise the wording, depending on what was deemed appropriate after reviewing the proposed drafts.