TAMAROVIC & GILLARD

The case involved a dispute between a mother and father concerning the living arrangements and parental responsibility for their child, B. The mother alleged that the father posed an unacceptable risk of physical and sexual abuse to the child, citing the child's developmental delay, purported post-traumatic stress disorder, and behavioural issues, including sexualised behaviour and fear of the father. Conversely, the father asserted that the mother was an unacceptable risk of emotional harm to the child, suggesting the child's fear of him was a product of the mother's influence. The Department and Police had determined not to investigate the father. The matter came before Hogan J.

The court was required to determine with whom the child, B, should live, and the extent of each parent's parental responsibility and time with the child. This involved assessing the allegations of abuse and emotional harm, the child's welfare and best interests, and the credibility of the parents' claims and concerns. The court also needed to establish appropriate communication and contact arrangements, considering the existing limitations on the father's contact and the mother's allegations.

Hogan J reasoned that the mother's claims regarding the father's alleged abuse were not substantiated to the extent that they warranted preventing the child from living with him. The court noted that third parties did not agree with the mother's assessment of the child's behaviour or fears. Conversely, the court found the mother to be an unacceptable risk of emotionally harming the child. Consequently, the court ordered that the child live with the father, discharging all previous parenting plans and orders. The father was granted sole parental responsibility for long-term issues, with specific procedural requirements for consulting the mother, and sole responsibility for day-to-day care. Detailed arrangements were made for the child's time with the mother, commencing with supervised contact and transitioning to unsupervised time, along with specific communication protocols and holiday arrangements. The mother was also restrained from attending the child's school during school hours until the commencement of Term 1 in 2015.