TOTHILL & CROWTHER

In this matter before Hannam J, the proceedings concerned a dispute between Mr Tothill and Ms Crowther regarding their child. The core of the dispute involved the recovery of the child to the father's care, particularly in light of existing intervention orders.

The court was required to determine the legal issues arising from the interaction between family law parenting orders and a state-based intervention order. Specifically, the court had to consider the validity and effect of an intervention order that restrained the father from having contact with the child, when this conflicted with existing family law orders that provided for the child to spend time with the father. The court also needed to address how any such inconsistencies should be managed and explained.

Hannam J applied principles from the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly sections 68R and 68P, which address the relationship between family law orders and family violence orders, including intervention orders. The court reasoned that a state intervention order is invalid to the extent that it is inconsistent with a family law order of the kind referred to in section 68R. In this instance, the intervention order restraining the father from contact was found to be inconsistent with the family law parenting orders and was therefore invalid to that extent. The court also noted that where a parenting order is inconsistent with an existing family violence order, the court must specify the inconsistency and provide a detailed explanation of how contact is to occur, which was addressed in the detailed judgment.

The court made several orders by consent, including the provision of specific documents to the Magistrates Court of South Australia for use in criminal proceedings against the father. These documents were to be placed in a confidential envelope and presented to the magistrate for argument regarding their use. Pending further order, the mother was restrained from contacting or approaching the child and from attending the child's school, with this order carrying a power of arrest. The court also suspended interim orders 12 and 13 of the final parenting orders made on 30 June 2017. Further directions were given for the exchange of proposed minutes of order regarding the mother's time with the child and outlines of case, with a hearing date to be allocated thereafter.