Ruston and Byford

In *Ruston and Byford*, heard in the Family Court of Australia, the applicant mother sought orders to relocate with her two sons from the B local government area to the Northern Rivers region of New South Wales. The respondent father sought orders for equal shared parental responsibility and for the children to spend equal time with each parent, which inherently required the mother to remain in close proximity to the B area. The central dispute before the court was whether the mother should be permitted to relocate the children's residence, and if not, the extent of time the children should spend with each parent.

The court was required to determine the paramount consideration of the children's best interests in light of the proposed relocation and the competing parenting proposals. This involved evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of each party's proposed arrangements, considering the legislative framework introduced by amendments to the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) on 1 July 2006, including the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility and the considerations for equal or substantial and significant time. The court also had to assess the impact of any changes on the children's circumstances, their relationships with each parent and other significant persons, and the practicalities of implementing the proposed arrangements.

Collier J applied the principles outlined in *A & A (Relocation Approach)*, emphasising that while the best interests of the children are paramount, the court must evaluate each proposal and consider the legislative directions. The court found that the mother's desire to relocate was primarily driven by her own needs and relationship, and that such a move would significantly reduce the children's time with their father and potentially disrupt their schooling and relationships with extended family. Conversely, the father's proposal for equal time, while beneficial in principle, was deemed not reasonably practicable due to the parties' lack of proximity and insufficient levels of communication, trust, and cooperation. Consequently, the court ordered that the children live with their mother, with the mother being restrained from relocating their residence outside the B local government area, and established a schedule for the children to spend substantial and significant time with their father, including alternate weekends, Tuesday nights during school terms, and half of all school holidays.