Zemmpler & Anor and Page & Anor

In the Family Court of Australia, Mr Zemmpler and Mr Ryall (the applicants) sought orders concerning the parenting of a child, K, born in February 2008. The respondents, Ms Page and Mr Tietzel, are K's biological parents and consented to the orders sought by the applicants. The dispute centred on with whom the child would live, who would have parental responsibility, and arrangements for contact with the biological parents.

The court was required to determine whether to make orders for K to live with the applicants, for the applicants to have sole parental responsibility, and for K to spend time with his biological parents. In doing so, the court had to consider the paramountcy of the child's best interests, as outlined in section 60B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), and the specific considerations set out in section 60CC of the Act, including the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility and the potential risks of harm to the child.

Justice Benjamin applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), noting that the applicants had been the primary attachment figures for K for most of his life, and that K did not have a meaningful relationship with his biological parents. The court found that while the applicants intended to facilitate contact with the biological family, there were concerns regarding the biological parents' history of violence and legal issues, which could pose a risk of emotional harm to the child. The court concluded that equal shared parental responsibility was not appropriate between the biological parents and the applicants, but was appropriate between the applicants themselves, given their commitment and capacity to provide a child-focused upbringing.

The court made orders granting the applicants equal shared parental responsibility for K, that K live with the applicants, and that the applicants be permitted to change K's surname. Orders were also made for K to spend time with his biological parents and siblings as agreed between the adults, with specific provisions for the applicants to facilitate ongoing knowledge of and safe contact with the biological family. The matter was then removed from the list of cases requiring determination.