Thestor and Bugno (No. 2)

In *Thestor and Bugno (No. 2)* [2013] FamCA 708, the Family Court of Australia considered a contravention application brought by Ms Thestor (the wife) against Mr Bugno (the husband) concerning parenting orders made on 13 March 2013. The proceedings also addressed the need to vary the existing parenting orders due to their ineffectiveness and the parties' inability to co-parent effectively, with the paramount consideration being the best interests of the children.

The court was required to determine the appropriate orders to be made following a finding that the husband had contravened previous court orders, and to reconsider the existing parenting arrangements in light of the children's welfare and the parties' ongoing conflict. Specifically, the court needed to address the husband's contravention under s 70NEB of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and to make new orders that would better serve the children's best interests, as mandated by s 60CA of the Act.

Justice Cronin found that the existing orders were not working, largely due to the parties' inability to communicate and their conflicting demands regarding the children's activities and schedules. The court noted that the children, aged 10 and nearly eight, were being negatively impacted by their parents' "parallel parenting" and the pressures of their highly structured activities. The court applied the principles of the *Family Law Act*, particularly s 60CA and s 60CC, to ensure that any new orders prioritised the children's best interests. The court reasoned that the existing orders were too prescriptive and lacked flexibility, leading to difficulties in their implementation and contributing to the parental conflict.

The court ordered the discharge of several paragraphs from the March 2013 orders, including those relating to specific activities and communication protocols. The husband was required to enter into a 12-month bond on the condition that he complied with all future court orders, with a fact sheet detailing obligations and consequences attached to the orders. New interim telephone communication arrangements were established, and the matter was adjourned for a two-day final hearing in February 2014, with directions for the filing of evidence and amended applications. The husband was also ordered to pay the wife's costs fixed at $1600.