SHAW & COOPER

This matter came before Judge Monahan concerning parenting arrangements for a child. The dispute involved the father and mother of the child, with applications concerning the child's living arrangements and time spent with each parent.

The court was required to determine several legal issues, including the interim living arrangements for the child, the specific times the child would spend with each parent during school terms and holidays, and provisions for telephone contact. Additionally, the court needed to address the appointment of a single expert witness to report on matters relating to the child's welfare, including potential risks of harm, the child's views, relationships with parents, and the parents' capacity to meet the child's needs. The court also considered the allocation of costs for the expert report and made orders regarding the return of the child's school bag and safety precautions on water vessels.

In reaching its decision, the court applied principles of family law concerning the best interests of the child. It ordered that the child live with the Applicant Father, with specific, detailed arrangements for the child to spend time with the Respondent Mother, including provisions for special days. The court appointed a child and family psychiatrist as a single expert witness to investigate and report on a comprehensive list of welfare-related matters, with both parents to share the costs of this report. The court also made orders restraining both parties from denigrating the other or discussing the proceedings with the child, and noted the father's undertaking not to disclose the mother's address.

The court ordered that all extant applications be adjourned for mention upon the release of the expert report. The objection to a subpoena filed on 13 January 2015 was withdrawn. Pending further order, the court made interim parenting orders detailing the child's living arrangements and time with each parent, the appointment of a single expert, and cost sharing for the expert report. The court also noted its expectation that the parties would participate in mediation following the release of the expert report.