RADCLIFFE & MARLOW

The parties to this proceeding were the mother and the father, concerning final parenting orders made in December 2014. These orders stipulated that the child would live with the mother and have communication and substantial and significant time with the father. The dispute arose when the mother applied to vary these final orders, and her application was heard and determined in the father's absence, on an undefended basis, by Cleary J of the Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine the appropriate parenting arrangements for the child in light of a significant alteration in circumstances. Specifically, the court considered an altercation between the father and the maternal grandmother, which led to the father retaining the child. This event was followed by the mother filing an urgent application for a recovery order, after which the father returned the child to the mother. Crucially, the child had not seen the father since May 2015, and the father had not filed any material in the current proceedings.

Cleary J reasoned that while the mother's application was heard undefended, it was appropriate to allow a further period for the father to indicate his intention regarding future contact with the child. The court determined that if the father failed to advise the mother of his intentions, or if he indicated a decision to cease spending time with the child, the existing parenting orders should be discharged. In such an event, new orders would become operative without further reference to the parties, confirming the mother with sole parental responsibility and residence, and stipulating that the father's time and communication with the child would be as agreed between the parties in writing.