Richards and Scotchmer

This case involved an application before the Family Court of Australia concerning interim parenting orders for a child aged three and a half. The applicant mother, Ms Richards, was residing in Country C due to visa difficulties, while the child was living with the respondent father in Australia. The mother sought interim orders for the child to reside with her in Country C until she could secure a visa to return to Australia, a process estimated to take between six and eighteen months.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the child should relocate to Country C on an interim basis, considering the child's young age and the paramount importance of stability. The court was required to determine the child's best interests in the context of interim proceedings, applying the principles and considerations outlined in Part VII of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), including the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility and the specific considerations under section 60CC of the Act.

Justice Murphy reasoned that stability was the most significant consideration for a child of this age. The court noted that relocating the child to Country C would involve dislocation from her established environment and care arrangements, requiring adjustment to a new country and the mother's new partner. While acknowledging the importance of the child maintaining a meaningful relationship with both parents, the court found that the mother's proposal for an indeterminate period of residence in Country C, followed by a further relocation back to Australia, militated against the principle of stability. Consequently, the court was not persuaded to make orders for the child to live in Country C on an interim basis.

The court ordered that the child live with the father in Australia. Further orders were made to facilitate the child spending time with and communicating with the mother, including telephone and Skype contact, and face-to-face contact as agreed. The mother was restrained from removing the child from Australia, and the child's passport was to be surrendered to the Registrar of the Family Court. The matter was adjourned for further directions, and the father's costs were reserved.