SLEIMAN & GANIM

In the matter of *Sleiman & Ganim*, heard by Judge Harman, the dispute concerned the future care arrangements for a young child, X. The Applicant Mother sought orders for sole parental responsibility, that the child live with her, and that the child spend no time with the Respondent Father. The Mother's application was predicated on significant concerns regarding the Father's potential influence on the child's religious, political, and ideological views, as well as fears that the Father might attempt to take the child overseas. Crucially, the child had experienced no meaningful time or communication with the Father for the majority of their life.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child in circumstances where there was a significant lack of a relationship between the child and the Father, and where the child had no lived memory or experience of the Father. This involved considering the weight to be given to the child's views, particularly in light of their expressed reluctance to develop a relationship with the Father. The court also had to consider whether a summary disposal of the proceedings was appropriate, and if so, on what basis. Furthermore, the court was asked to consider an application for costs by the independent children's lawyer, specifically in relation to hardship.

Judge Harman reasoned that significant weight could be placed on the child's views in not wishing to develop a relationship with the Father, given the lack of prior interaction. The court applied the principle that meaningful involvement of both parents in a child's life should be pursued to the extent consistent with the child's best interests. In this instance, the court found that the best interests of the child were served by not facilitating any relationship with the Father at this time. The court also determined that a summary disposal was appropriate, as a full hearing would not be in the child's best interests. The application for costs by the independent children's lawyer was dismissed.

The court ordered that the Applicant Mother have sole parental responsibility and that the child live with her. The child was to spend no time with the Father. The Father was restrained from approaching or contacting the Mother and/or child, and from engaging third parties to do so. The Minister was directed to issue an Australian passport for the child without the Father's consent, and the Father's consent for passport purposes was dispensed with. The Mother was granted possession of the child's passport. The Independent Children's Lawyer was discharged with the Court's thanks, and all issues were removed from the list of cases awaiting hearing. Leave was granted to the Independent Children's Lawyer to seek orders for a contribution to costs by each party, but the application for costs was dismissed.