Stamos and Mariakis

This matter concerned interim orders made by Justice Le Poer Trench in the Family Court of Australia regarding the parental responsibility and living arrangements for a child born in August 2002. The dispute involved the parents, Mr Mariakis (the father) and Ms Stamos (the mother), and their respective roles in the child's life. The court was required to determine the terms of interim orders governing the child's residence, parental responsibility, and contact arrangements, as well as addressing concerns related to supervision, communication between parents, and the child's welfare.

The court was tasked with establishing a framework for the child's care and contact with both parents, including specific provisions for parental responsibility, the child's living arrangements, and detailed contact schedules. Key issues included the level of supervision required for the father's time with the child, the nature and method of communication between the parents, and measures to ensure the child's safety and well-being, particularly in light of allegations of sexual abuse. The court also had to consider the appointment and role of an Independent Children's Lawyer and the potential for future final orders.

Justice Le Poer Trench made extensive interim orders, suspending initial orders that granted the father sole parental responsibility and primary residence. Instead, the mother was granted sole parental responsibility and the child was to live with her, subject to detailed contact arrangements for the father. These orders included specific conditions for supervision of the father's contact, restrictions on the father's personal conduct with the child, and requirements for both parents to attend psychological counselling. The court also mandated communication protocols, including the use of a communication book, and imposed restrictions on parental relocation and employment near the child's school. The Independent Children's Lawyer's role was extended, and the matter was to be relisted for further consideration, with the interim orders to become final if not relisted within eighteen months. The court also made specific orders regarding the destruction of DVDs containing disclosures by the child.