Saleh and Hamad

In the Family Court of Australia, Mr Saleh (the applicant father) and Ms Hamad (the respondent mother) were involved in litigation concerning parenting arrangements for their son and daughter, born in 2000 and 2001 respectively. The proceedings commenced in the Local Court and were transferred to the Federal Magistrates Court, where they were consolidated. The court appointed an Independent Children’s Lawyer to represent the children's interests. Despite numerous interim orders and attempts at mediation, the parties consistently failed to comply with court directions and arrangements for the children to spend time with their father.

The court was required to determine the parenting arrangements for the children, considering the paramountcy of the children's best interests under section 60CA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved assessing the primary considerations under section 60CC(2), including the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents and the need to protect the children from harm. The court also had to consider the additional considerations under section 60CC(3), such as the parents' willingness and ability to facilitate a relationship with the other parent, and the likely effect of any changes in the children's circumstances. The presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under section 61DA was also a relevant consideration, subject to exceptions for child abuse or family violence.

Stevenson J found that both parents demonstrated a significant lack of insight into their children's needs, being absorbed by their own adult issues and unwilling or unable to focus on the children's best interests. The mother's consistent non-compliance with court orders and failure to attend appointments with professionals, including a psychiatrist and family consultant, severely hampered the court's ability to gather necessary evidence. The father, while making some efforts to maintain contact, also exhibited a vindictive approach towards the mother's relationship with the children, proposing a six-month no-contact period if he did not secure residence. Given the parties' demonstrated inability and unwillingness to comply with court orders and their focus on their own disputes rather than the children's welfare, the court concluded that making further parenting orders would be futile.

Consequently, Stevenson J ordered the discharge of all prior parenting orders concerning the children and the dismissal of all outstanding applications by either party. The court noted that this outcome was unsatisfactory but attributed it to the parties' own conduct.