RONCALLI & RONCALLI

This matter concerned an application by the mother for orders regarding the time the children, D, E, and F, would spend with her, specifically seeking Tuesday and Thursday afternoon contact from school until 7:30 pm, in addition to alternate weekends. The father opposed this application, arguing that there was no reason to differentiate between the children in the proposed arrangements. The court was required to determine whether the mother's proposed contact arrangements were in the best interests of the children, considering the expert evidence and the children's existing routines and activities.

Stevenson J considered the expert report of Dr O, which indicated that D and E would be distressed if removed from their father, but that this distress would settle with regular contact with their mother, provided their current school placements and extracurricular activities were maintained. The father detailed the children's numerous extracurricular activities, highlighting their busy schedules. The mother indicated her intention to rent accommodation in a specific suburb and collect the children from school to take them to their activities before returning them to the father's apartment.

The court determined that it was in the best interests of the children to allow them to settle into the current arrangements, given the disruptions and parental hostility they had experienced since the separation. Stevenson J was mindful of Dr O's assessment that D's stance towards his mother was strongly influenced by his father, noting D's expressed opposition to overnight contact, which appeared inconsistent with his underlying desire for a relationship with his mother. The judge observed that D's views had been significantly influenced by his father, who had allegedly informed him that his mother was "crazy" and suffering from a mental illness, and had validated D's experiences, thereby encouraging his opposition to contact. Consequently, the court found that the existing arrangements should not be varied until the children had become settled.

The court dismissed the applications filed by both parties, with the exception of the orders already made by consent. These consent orders established equal shared parental responsibility for all three children, with D and E living with their father and spending time with their mother, and F living with the mother and spending time with the father. The orders also detailed specific arrangements for school term time, school holidays, and special days, including provisions for the return of F's passport, prohibitions on denigration, requirements for communication, and financial orders relating to property settlement and outstanding debts.