SKINNER & CLUNY

This matter concerned an application by the father to re-litigate parenting orders made in 2012, which the mother opposed. The court was required to determine whether there had been a sufficient change in circumstances since the final parenting orders were made to justify re-litigation, considering the best interests of the child. Additionally, the court addressed an application by the mother for the discharge of the Independent Children's Lawyer, alleging negligence in their conduct.

The primary legal issue was whether the circumstances had changed sufficiently to warrant a review of the existing parenting orders, a question often referred to as the *Rice & Asplund* issue. This involved balancing the finality of court orders against the need to ensure arrangements remain in the child's best interests. The court also had to consider the mother's allegations of negligence against the Independent Children's Lawyer, specifically their failure to initiate proceedings regarding the *Rice & Asplund* issue and to issue subpoenas prior to the trial.

In determining the *Rice & Asplund* issue, the court noted that the child was very young when the 2012 orders were made and had recently been diagnosed with anxiety. Furthermore, the parties were no longer in agreement with the existing orders and appeared intent on ongoing litigation. Weighing these factors, the court found that it was in the child's best interests to re-litigate the appropriate parenting arrangements. The application to discharge the Independent Children's Lawyer was dismissed, as the court found no merit in the mother's arguments regarding alleged negligence.

The court ordered that the Trial Management Hearing in this matter be resumed at 2:15pm on 1 August 2018 by Global Meet Teleconference.