Wordsworth & Wordsworth

In this case, the mother appealed against a decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia which involved the relocation of children and the arrangements for their care. The primary judge had found that it was reasonably practicable for the children to spend equal time with both parents in Region Q. The mother contested this decision on the grounds that the primary judge failed to properly consider the reasonable practicability of the arrangement and that the factual findings did not support such a conclusion.

The legal issues before the court were whether the primary judge erred in law by not adequately addressing the reasonable practicability of the equal time arrangement and whether the factual findings supported the conclusion that such an arrangement was reasonably practicable. The court had to examine the evidence and the reasoning of the primary judge to determine if there was a legal error and if the findings were supported by the evidence.

The court found that the primary judge did not err in law and that the factual findings adequately supported the conclusion of reasonable practicability. The court emphasised that the primary judge had considered the evidence thoroughly and had made findings that were consistent with the evidence presented. The court held that the mother's contentions were not tenable and that the appeal should be dismissed.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the mother's appeal and upheld the primary judge's decision that it was reasonably practicable for the children to spend equal time with both parents in Region Q. The court found no legal error in the primary judge's consideration of reasonable practicability and supported the factual findings that led to this conclusion.