SALTERN & MINK

In *Saltern & MINK*, Vasta J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning parenting arrangements and a proposed relocation. The primary issue before the court was whether to grant the mother's application to relocate with the child to Queensland, which the father opposed. The court was required to determine whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility applied and, if so, whether it was rebutted by evidence of family violence.

The central legal question was whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility, as stipulated by the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), should be displaced due to the presence of family violence. The court had to assess the evidence presented by both parties regarding the nature and impact of the alleged family violence on the child and the parents' ability to co-parent effectively. This involved considering whether the violence was such that it would be impracticable for the child to have a meaningful relationship with both parents.

Vasta J found that the evidence established a pattern of family violence perpetrated by the father against the mother. This violence was of a nature and seriousness that it rebutted the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. The court reasoned that it was not in the child's best interests to maintain a relationship with the father that was characterised by such violence, and that the mother's proposed relocation was therefore permissible. The court applied the principles outlined in the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) concerning the best interests of the child and the impact of family violence on parenting arrangements.

The court ordered that the mother be permitted to relocate with the child to Queensland.