Perks and Doney

In the matter of *Perks and Doney*, heard by Judge Dunkley, the father sought to vary existing parenting orders. The mother opposed this application. The dispute concerned the parenting arrangements for the parties' child, specifically the father's request for increased time with the child.

The central legal issue before the court was whether there had been a significant change in the child's circumstances since the making of the last parenting orders, such that it would be in the child's best interests to reconsider the existing arrangements. The court was required to assess the evidence presented by both parties in light of the relevant provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly those concerning the paramountcy of the child's best interests and the threshold for varying final parenting orders.

Judge Dunkley found that the evidence did not establish a significant change in the child's circumstances that would warrant a variation of the existing orders. The court applied the principles that a party seeking to vary final parenting orders must demonstrate a material change in circumstances and that any variation must be demonstrably in the child's best interests. Having considered the evidence and the legal framework, the court concluded that the father's application should not be granted.

Consequently, the court dismissed the father's application for variation. The existing orders made on 17 April 2013 were confirmed, and all outstanding applications and responses were removed from the list of cases awaiting finalisation.