Re G: Children's Schooling

This matter concerned an application by the father for orders regarding the schooling of his two children, a boy and a girl, who were aged 10 and 8 respectively. The mother opposed the application. The dispute arose in the context of ongoing family law proceedings concerning the children. The case was heard in the Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether the father had established a sufficient case to warrant the making of orders for the children to attend a particular school, contrary to the mother's wishes. This involved considering the paramountcy principle, which dictates that the best interests of the children are the primary consideration in all matters relating to their welfare. The Court also had to assess the evidence presented by both parents regarding the suitability of the proposed schooling arrangements and the potential impact on the children.

The Court's reasoning focused on the application of the paramountcy principle and the need for a robust evidentiary basis to justify a departure from the status quo or a parent's expressed wishes. It was held that the father had not discharged the onus of demonstrating that the proposed schooling was demonstrably in the children's best interests, particularly when weighed against the mother's objections and the potential disruption to the children's existing lives. The Court emphasised that mere preference for a particular educational institution is insufficient without compelling evidence of superior benefit to the children.

The Full Court dismissed the father's appeal, upholding the primary judge's decision not to make the orders sought.