Richmond & Tirado (No. 2)

In the matter of *Richmond & Tirado (No. 2)*, Gill J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications by the mother, Ms. Tirado, against the father, Mr. Richmond, concerning parenting arrangements for their child, X, and related financial and procedural matters. The dispute involved the modification of existing parenting orders, the enforceability of a binding financial agreement, and applications for litigation funding and injunctive relief.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. Firstly, whether the existing parenting orders made by Judge Tonkin on 26 October 2018 should be modified, particularly in light of X commencing school and the need for weekend time with both parents. Secondly, the court had to consider the mother's application for litigation funding to pursue a property application, which the father sought to prevent based on a binding financial agreement. Thirdly, the court addressed applications for restraints against the father and for disclosure and valuation orders.

Regarding the parenting orders, Gill J noted the Independent Children's Lawyer's position that while the existing orders balanced risks in each household, an adjustment was needed to facilitate weekend time with both parents. The court found that the circumstances did not warrant a significant change from the balance struck by Judge Tonkin, but agreed that some structural adjustment was appropriate to allow X weekend time with each parent now that he had started school. The court favoured the mother's proposed 4-3-3-4 arrangement (interpreted as 5-2-2-5) over a week-about arrangement, reasoning that the latter would cause an unduly extended separation from each parent. On the issue of litigation funding, the court acknowledged its jurisdiction to make such an order despite the disputed binding financial agreement, and that the consideration of justice under section 117 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) was paramount.

The court ordered the discharge of Order 3 of the 26 October 2018 parenting orders, with a new schedule for X to live with each parent operative from 23 April 2021, reflecting a modified shared time arrangement. The mother's applications for restraints, litigation funding, payment of loans, disclosure, and valuation were dismissed, noting an undertaking given by the father on 17 February 2021 in relation to the restraints and payment of loans. The parties were granted liberty to seek relisting of the matter on seven days' notice.