SHIBA & SHIBA

This case concerned parenting arrangements for three children aged 11, 10, and 4, who primarily resided with their mother. While the parties had reached agreement on many parenting issues during the trial, the court was required to determine the children's living arrangements during school terms and holidays, as well as the issue of overseas travel. The mother opposed overseas travel and sought specific weekend and school holiday time for the father, whereas the father sought a week-about living arrangement and equal school holiday time, along with permission for overseas travel. The Independent Children's Lawyer (ICL) proposed a phased increase in the father's time, culminating in 11 nights every four weeks, and for the children to spend half of their school holidays with the father from 2015.

The central legal issue before the court was to determine parenting orders that were in the best interests of the children, considering their meaningful relationships with both parents, the high level of conflict between them, and the single expert's recommendation against a week-about regime. The court found that an equal time arrangement would neither be in the children's best interests nor reasonably practical. The court's reasoning focused on ensuring substantial and significant time for both parents, balancing the children's need for stability with their relationships with each parent, and addressing the parental conflict.

The court ultimately made orders in line with the ICL's proposals. These orders detailed a phased increase in the father's time with the children during school terms, progressing over several stages until it reached 11 nights in every four weeks. The children were also to spend half of each school holiday period with each parent, with specific arrangements for the initial Christmas holidays and subsequent years. The court permitted international travel for the children, subject to specific notice and itinerary requirements to ensure it did not interfere with the other parent's time, unless consented to. The court also made orders regarding property settlement and superannuation.