VINEY & RILEY

This matter concerned an application by the father for sole parental responsibility for the child, B, and for the child to live with him. The mother sought orders for the child to spend time with her. The court was also required to determine the characterisation of liabilities incurred by the parties post-separation and to make property orders.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the father should have sole parental responsibility for the child, and the specific arrangements for the child's living and time-spending with each parent. Additionally, the court had to consider the characterisation of liabilities incurred by the parties after their relationship ended and how these, along with other assets, should be divided between them. The court also had to assess the risk of family violence and its impact on the child's welfare and the capacity of each parent to foster a meaningful relationship between the child and the other parent.

Gill J ordered that the father have sole parental responsibility for the child, and that the child live with the father. Specific, detailed orders were made regarding the child's time spent with the mother, including provisions for weekends, school terms, school holidays, and Christmas. The court also made orders for telephone communication between the child and the non-resident parent. In relation to property, the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent $210,426 within 90 days, and contemporaneously, the respondent was to withdraw specific caveats. The applicant was to retain certain assets, including properties, shareholdings, a vehicle, bank accounts, and furniture, to the exclusion of the respondent. The respondent was to retain her bank accounts, furniture, and superannuation benefits to the exclusion of the applicant, and was to indemnify the applicant against liabilities associated with these assets. Both parties were to be responsible for and indemnify the other against liabilities in their respective names. The appointment of the Independent Children’s Lawyer was to be discharged six months from the date of the orders.