SEIDLER & CERNY

The case of *Seidler & Cerny* concerned a dispute between a mother and father regarding parenting arrangements, property division, and child support for their six-year-old child. The father sought an equal time arrangement, while the mother sought to continue the existing arrangements with minor adjustments to reduce the number of changeovers. Both parties agreed to equal shared parental responsibility. The court also had to determine the division of property and a child support departure order sought by the mother.

The legal issues before the court included whether the existing parenting arrangements should continue or be varied to an equal time arrangement, considering the child's well-being and the father's attitude towards the mother and her family. The court was also required to assess the parties' contributions and future needs to determine a just and equitable property division, and to consider whether to grant a child support departure order under section 117 of the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth) given the parties' high incomes.

Loughnan J determined that the child was doing well under the current parenting arrangements and that there was a risk of the child being exposed to the father's negative attitude towards the mother and her family. Consequently, the court ordered that the current parenting arrangements continue, with minor adjustments to the schedule. In relation to property, the court found that despite the father's greater initial contribution and earning capacity, the mother's primary care of the child since separation and overall contributions warranted an adjustment. The property was divided 60 per cent in favour of the mother and 40 per cent in favour of the father. Finally, the court found it just and equitable to make a child support departure order, requiring the father to pay $300 per week in periodic child support, in addition to specific education and health-related costs.