Vardakas and Kanavas

This matter concerned an application before the court between Ms Vardakas (the mother) and Mr Kanavas (the father) regarding the parenting arrangements for their child. The dispute centred on whether the child should change her living circumstances to reside with the mother, or remain with the father.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child in accordance with the relevant provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Specifically, the court considered the likely effect of any change in the child's circumstances, including the impact of separation from a parent or other significant persons. It also examined the practical difficulties and expense associated with a child spending time and communicating with a parent, and whether these factors would substantially affect the child's right to maintain regular contact with both parents. Furthermore, the court assessed the maturity, sex, lifestyle, and background of the child and parents, as well as any family violence involving the child or a family member, and the preference for an order least likely to lead to further proceedings.

The court reasoned that a change in the child's living circumstances to reside with the mother would likely be traumatic, given it would be the second time the child would have to cope with removal from her primary caregiver. This was deemed not to be in the child's best interests. The court found that logistics had not prevented the mother or her family from seeing the child, as both parties had resided in Melbourne for the majority of the time, with the mother's absence in Queensland and Country P being voluntary. The court also noted the child's close relationship with her paternal aunt, who could provide guidance, particularly as the child approached adolescence. While the court could not make definitive findings about historical family violence, it was satisfied that there was no evidence of ongoing problems.

The court made orders that maintained the status quo, meaning there would be no change in the child's living circumstances. While acknowledging this was not an ideal outcome, the court expressed hope that the mother could be part of the child's life in the future, but considered it unrealistic for the present. The court also noted that the father had agreed to counselling and obtaining an expert opinion on how to improve the situation, indicating a willingness to foster the child's best interests.