Tran and Ferguson

This case concerns parenting orders made by Rose J in relation to a child, N, born in October 2004. The proceedings involved the Mother, the Father, and an Intervenor. The court discharged all previous parenting orders and made new orders concerning the child's upbringing and time spent with each parent.

The legal issues before the court were to determine the best interests of the child, N, as the paramount consideration in making parenting orders, in accordance with section 60CA and 65AA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This required the court to consider the matters outlined in sections 60CC(2) and 60CC(3) of the Act, as well as the Objects and underlying principles of Part VII of the Act, as set out in section 60B. The court also had to consider the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under section 61DA(1) and whether it was rebutted by evidence of abuse or family violence, or if equal shared parental responsibility would not be in the child's best interests.

Rose J applied the paramount consideration of the child's best interests, referencing the factors in sections 60B, 60CC(2), and 60CC(3) of the *Family Law Act 1975*. The court noted the objects of Part VII, including the benefit of meaningful parental involvement, protection from harm, and ensuring children reach their full potential. The principles underlying these objects, such as the right to know and be cared for by both parents and the joint sharing of parental responsibilities, were considered, subject to the overarching principle that the child's best interests are paramount. The presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under section 61DA(1) was also addressed, with the court considering the exceptions outlined in section 61DA(2) regarding abuse, family violence, or circumstances where equal shared parental responsibility would not be in the child's best interests.

The court ordered that the Intervenor have sole parental responsibility for major long-term issues concerning the child's education, religious and cultural upbringing, health, name, and significant changes to living arrangements. The child was ordered to live with the Mother, with specific time arrangements detailed for the Father's contact. Further orders included provisions for the day-to-day care of the child, restrictions on alcohol consumption by the Father, restraints on the parents' conduct towards each other and in the child's presence, and communication protocols regarding the child's health and schooling. The court also requested the Mother's solicitor to arrange for the judgment and orders to be translated into Mandarin for the Mother.