Prouse and Prouse

This matter concerned an application before Dessau J of the Family Court of Australia, concerning the interim residence and time arrangements for the two young sons of Mr and Mrs Prouse. The dispute arose after the father removed the children from the mother's care, alleging concerns about her capacity to care for them, including drug use and inappropriate behaviour. The mother denied these allegations and contended that the children's removal disrupted their established routines, schooling, and necessary medical and therapeutic support.

The court was required to determine the interim parenting orders for the children, considering the father's allegations and the mother's counterclaims, within the framework of the Family Law Act, as amended by the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006. The court also had to consider the principles outlined in cases such as *Goode v Goode* regarding the procedure for making interim parenting orders and the importance of the child's best interests, without necessarily prioritising the status quo.

Dessau J reasoned that despite the conflicting and untested versions of events presented by the parents, two key factors facilitated a decision. Firstly, the individual who had allegedly prompted the father's alarm, Mr K, had not provided sworn evidence, and crucially, had consented to orders regarding his own daughter living with the mother. Secondly, the mother's parents had agreed to provide substantial attendance at the mother's home to ensure the children's safety. Based on these assurances, the court concluded that it was in the children's best interests to return to live with their mother, resuming their previous routines, schooling, and medical appointments.

The court made orders for equal shared parental responsibility, with the children to spend time with the father on alternate weekends and during specified school holidays, and with the mother at all other times, subject to the attendance of a maternal grandparent. Injunctions were granted to restrain the removal of the children from Australia, and an Independent Children's Lawyer was to be appointed. The proceedings were adjourned for a family report to be prepared and for further interim hearing.