VIDLER & VIDLER

In the matter of *Vidler & Vidler*, Berman J of the Family Court of Australia considered interim parenting orders concerning four children. The children resided with their mother, and their time with the father had been limited and ad hoc. The father sought regular time with the children, which the mother opposed unless it was supervised, citing allegations of physical and sexual abuse by the father towards her and the children. The father denied these allegations.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in circumstances of contested allegations of family violence. Specifically, the court had to consider the appropriate interim arrangements for the children's time with the father, balancing the need to protect the children from potential harm with the importance of maintaining the children's relationship with their father. The court also had to navigate the conflicting evidence and the recommendations of the Independent Children's Lawyer, who supported supervised time.

Berman J adopted a cautious approach, acknowledging the contested nature of the evidence and the need for risk assessment in interim matters. The court applied the paramount principle of the best interests of the child. The reasoning involved weighing the mother's serious allegations against the father's denials and considering the limited involvement of Child Protection Services. The court also noted the Independent Children's Lawyer's support for supervised time.

The court ordered that the children live with the mother. The father was granted supervised time with the children on three occasions each Saturday morning, followed by alternate Saturdays from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, with supervision by one or both paternal grandparents. Handovers were to occur at a specific McDonald's restaurant. The parties were prohibited from discussing the proceedings with the children. The matter was adjourned for a final hearing, with directions for the filing of evidence, financial statements, and a family report.