Rowling and Plunkett

This matter concerned competing applications between Ms Rowling (the applicant mother) and Mr Plunkett (the respondent father) regarding the time a young child, B, would spend with each parent. The central dispute arose from serious allegations of sexual abuse made by the mother against the father. These allegations had been investigated by numerous agencies, including Child Protection Services and Families SA, none of whom substantiated the claims. The mother had since withdrawn all allegations of sexual abuse.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child, B, in light of the withdrawn allegations and the findings of various agencies. Specifically, the court needed to consider whether it was appropriate to increase the father's time with the child, and if so, on what basis. The father sought orders for increased time during the intervening week, beyond the existing alternate weekend arrangements.

Justice Burr considered expert psychological assessments which indicated the child would be safe in the father's care and that the father presented as the better parenting option. The court noted the mother's significant shift in position, acknowledging the lack of evidence for the abuse allegations and consenting to their withdrawal. While accepting the father's request for increased time, the court emphasised the need for a gradual adjustment for the child, given the significant changes she had already experienced. The court therefore ordered that the father's time with B would increase on a graduated basis, commencing with alternate Thursdays to Fridays, to allow for a more gradual adjustment.