Family Court of Australia
Sealy & Sealy  FamCA 523 (30 June 2016)
Parenting – whether two of the children have been sexually abused by the father – where there is no suggestion the parties’ male child has been sexually abused by the father – whether the children are at an unacceptable risk of harm if they spend unsupervised time with the father.
George & Nichols  FamCA 519 (29 June 2016)
Parenting – where the child has been living with the mother and not spending any time with the father – where the father was acquitted of charges of sexual offences against the child’s half-sister – where the father was preoccupied with these charges – where the father did not ask any question of any witness in relation to the subject child – where the father did not direct any submission to the child’s time with him – where the father admitted acts of family violence – where father’s own admissions form basis for finding that the child would be exposed to an unacceptable risk of harm were she to spend time with the father – where the mother genuinely believes the father sexually assaulted her daughter from a previous relationship – where that belief is not irrational or baseless – where the mother’s parenting capacity would be compromised were the child to spend any time with the father.
Leighton & Moriarty and Ors  FamCA 492 (20 June 2016)
Parenting – where agreement was reached between the mother, father and paternal great grandparents as to most issues in the proceedings – where the only issue for determination was whether there should be an injunction restraining the father and paternal great grandparents from bringing the child into the presence of a paternal uncle – where there have been allegations of sexual abuse – whether the paternal uncle constitutes an unacceptable risk to the child – whether supervision by the father would sufficiently protect the child – where the court finds that the father would take all steps necessary to ensure the child’s safety – orders made for the father to supervise all and any contact between the child and the paternal uncle.
Tolbert & Tolbert (No 2)  FamCA 532 (19 May 2016)
Parenting – order made for the father to have parental responsibility with respect to immunising the children in accordance with the Australian Immunisation Guidelines and Recommendations
Baxter & Baxter  FamCA 572 (7 March 2016)
Parenting – best interests – where the mother sought orders enabling her to relocate to Ireland with the children – where it was common ground the children will continue to live with the mother – where the children have meaningful relationships with both parents – where the children are not in need of any protection against the risk of physical or psychological harm through their exposure to family violence committed by the father – where the mother is not exposed to an unacceptable risk of family violence – where the mother’s parenting capacity would deteriorate to the detriment of the children if forced to maintain her residence with the children in Australia – where the evidence does not justify restraint on the mother’s relocation with the children to Ireland, provided she obtains advance recognition of the orders in Ireland and financially empowers the father to travel there to visit them – where as a condition precedent to the mother’s removal of the children from Australia, she must obtain from a court of competent jurisdiction in Ireland a declaration that the Australian orders are registered and enforceable in Ireland and pay a stipulated sum to the father, in default of which she is restrained from moving the children’s residence more than 500 kilometres away from where they currently live – where the children will spend time with the father under differing regimes, depending upon the proximity of the parties’ homes
Parenting – parental responsibility – where it is not in the children’s best interests for the parties to have equal shared parental responsibility – where the mother should be conferred with exclusion parental responsibility for the children