Dufour & Ono (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 963 (24 December 2025)

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court's records.

Note: This copy of the Court's Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Dufour & Ono has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

1. On 2 May 2023, the applicant father ("the father") initiated parenting proceedings by filing an Initiating Application for Final Parenting Orders. In that Initiating Application, the father sought the following orders:

Parental Responsibility

1. That the parents have equal shared parental responsibility for the care, welfare and development of [X] born [in 2022] ("the child").

2. That the parties have sole responsibility for making decisions about the day-to-day care, welfare and development of the child during the periods when the child is living with them except as otherwise provided in these Orders.

Time with the Child

3. That the child live with the Mother.

1. That the child spend time with the Father as agreed, and failing agreement as follows:

a) From the age of 1 year, 6 months to 2 years;

1. Each Tuesday and Thursday from 3:00pm to 5:00pm; and

2. Each Saturday from 8:00am to 4:00pm.

(b) From the age of 2 years to 2 years, 6 months:

1. In week 1, and each alternate week thereafter, Tuesday and Thursday from 2:00pm until 6:00pm; and

2. In week 2, and each alternate week thereafter, Tuesday 2:00pm until 6:00pm and Saturday 8:00am until 6:00pm.

(c) From the age of 2 years, 6 months to 3 years;

1. In week 1, and each alternate week thereafter, Tuesday and Thursday from 2:00pm until 6:00pm; and;

2. In week 2, and each alternate week thereafter, Saturday 5:00pm until Sunday 5:00pm.

(d) From the age of 3 years to 5 years;

1. In week 1, and each alternate week thereafter, Tuesday and Thursday from 2:00pm until 6:00pm; and

2. In week 2, and each alternate week thereafter, Friday 5:00pm until Sunday 5:00pm.

(e) That upon the child turning 5 years, the Mother and Father shall participate in family dispute resolution counselling with a family relationship centre or a person authorised under section 10G of the Family Law Act 1975 to review the arrangements for the child.

1. Should either parent be unable to personally care for the child for in excess of 24 hours, they shall offer the other party the first right to care for the child, and in the event the non-resident parent is unable to assist, the resident parent shall make suitable care arrangements for the child.

2. That notwithstanding any previous clauses, the child shall spend time with the parents on special occasions as agreed between the parents, and failing agreement as follows:

(a) In odd years with the Father from 9:00am Christmas Eve until 12:00pm Christmas Day, and with the Mother from 12:00pm Christmas Day until 5:00pm Boxing Day;

(b) In even years with the Mother from 9:00am Christmas Eve until 12:00pm Christmas Day, and with the Father from 12:00pm Christmas Day until 5:00pm Boxing Day;

(c) On Father's Day where the child would otherwise be in the care of the Mother, with the Father from 5:00pm the day before Father's Day until 5:00pm on Father's Day;

(d) On Mother's Day where the child would otherwise be in the care of the Father, with the Mother from 6:00pm the day before Mother's Day until 6:00pm on Mother's Day;

(e) On the child's birthday:

1. On weekends from 1:00pm to 5:00pm with the parent who does not have the child in their care;

2. On weekdays from after school or 3:00pm to 6:00pm with the parent who does not have the child in their care.

(f) On the Father's birthday:

1. On weekends from 1:00pm to 5:00pm if the child is not otherwise in the Father's care;

2. On weekdays from after school or 3:00pm to 6:00pm if the child is not otherwise in the Father's care.

(g) On the Mother's birthday:

1. On weekends from 1:00pm to 5:00pm if the child is not otherwise in the Mother's care;

2. On weekdays from after school or 3:00pm to 6:00pm if the child is not otherwise in the Mother's care.

3. That changeover take place at the child's school, or daycare where possible or if a changeover is to occur on a day when the child is not at daycare or school then changeover is to occur at the McDonalds [Suburb F] car park.

Communication

1. That unless otherwise agreed between the parties, the Father shall communicate with the child by video call between 5:00pm and 5:30pm every Monday and Wednesday with the Mother to initiate the call.

2. All communication between the Mother and Father is to be respectful in nature and to occur via email, unless in the case of an emergency at which time can occur by telephone, with each parent to respond as promptly as practicable to the other parent's contact.

10. The Father and Mother shall:

(a) Keep the other parent informed at all times of their residential address and telephone number, and advise the other parent of any change thereto within 48 hours of each change;

(b) Keep the other parent informed of the names and addresses of any treating medical or other allied health practitioners who treat the children and authorise those practitioners to provide the other parent with information that they are lawfully able to provide about the children; and

(c) Immediately inform the other parent of any medical condition, significant health issue or significant illness suffered by the children and authorise any treating medical practitioner to release the children's medical information to the other parent.

Miscellaneous

1. This order is to act as an authority for any educational or medical provider to provide to each party such information as concerning the child as is requested by either party.

2. Each party is to ensure that the other party is listed as next of kin at the child's day care centre/school/hospital or other medical provider where the child is seen.

3. That the party with care of the children will notify the other parent when the children will not be attending day care or school, for example when they are sick.

4. The parents shall authorise the educational facility attended by the child to give each parent information about the child's educational progress and other related activities and supply them with copies of reports, photographs, certificates and awards obtained by the child (at that parent's cost).

5. Both parents shall be permitted to attend all functions held by the educational facility that the child attends, but not limited to parent teacher interviews, sporting events, fetes, exhibitions, school plays or concerts, religious events, and any other extracurricular activities.

6. Should either parent seek to enrol the child in an extracurricular activity that will impact on the time the other parent is to spend with the child, they shall first obtain the written consent of the other parent before enrolling the child into that extracurricular activity.

17. During the time the child is with either parent, that parent shall:

a) Respect the privacy of the other parent and not question the child about the personal life of the other parent;

b) Speak of the other parent respectfully; and

1. Not denigrate or insult the other parent in the presence or hearing of the child and use their best endeavours to ensure that others do not denigrate or insult the other parent in the hearing or presence of the child, and further neither party defame the other via any form of social media.

Travel

1. Should either party seek to take the child overseas, they must follow the following protocol:

a) the parties are to ensure the child maintains a current passport;

b) the parent seeking to travel shall give the other parent written notice of such travel and seek the consent of the other parent to the proposed travel;

c) such written notice shall be given at least thirty (30) days prior to the intended date of travel; and

d) the parent seeking to take the child overseas shall ensure that the other parent has a full itinerary of the travel arrangements showing the date and time of departure and arrival back in Australia and telephone contact details at which the child can be reached at any time during the overseas travel;

e) the travelling parent shall ensure that the child contacts the non‑travelling parent by way of telephone and / or skype and / or facetime on every second day that the child is overseas; and

f) that neither parent unreasonably refuse proposed travel. If the parties are unable to reach agreement, the parties are to attend upon a Family Dispute Resolution Practitioner, and follow the protocol as set out herein.

Dispute Resolution

1. That in the event of a dispute arises about the terms or operation of these Orders, or a disagreement relating to the care arrangements for the child, the following process to be used for resolving any such dispute:

   a) the parties shall consult with the Family Dispute Resolution Practitioner to assist with resolving any dispute or reaching agreement about changes to be made;

   b) in the event the parties cannot agree on the appointment of the Family Dispute Resolution Practitioner, the party raising the dispute shall nominate three (3) practitioners and advise the other party in writing details of their fees, experience and availability;

   c) the party receiving the list shall choose one of the listed practitioners within seven (7) days of receipt of the list;

   d) if that party fails to choose then the other party may choose; and e) the parties shall share equally in the costs associated with the mediation, unless otherwise agreed.

2. Pursuant to s.65DA(2) and s.62B, the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these orders and details of who can assist the parties adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

1. In the respondent mother's ("the mother") Amended Response filed on 3 November 2025, the mother sought sole-decision-making responsibility for the parties' child, X born in 2022 ("the child"). The mother also proposed that she keep the father updated about major long-term decisions for the child and that the father be permitted to send limited gifts, cards and letters to the child.
2. The matter was listed for Defended Hearing on 11 November 2025.
3. On 8 October 2025, the father's solicitors filed a Notice of Ceasing to Act. Pursuant to the orders made on 20 May 2025, the father was to file his evidentiary material by 13 October 2025. The father did not comply with the trial directions as ordered and nor did he file any trial material at any time. In these circumstances, the Court advised a second proceeding would be listed with priority.
4. On the day of the hearing, 11 November 2025, the mother attended remotely via Webex link. The Court had agreed to the mother's appearance in that manner. Counsel for the mother and Independent Children's lawyer (ICL) attended in person. The father was called and made no appearance. At the commencement of the hearing, the mother's counsel made an oral application for the hearing to proceed on an undefended basis. Leave was granted, and the hearing proceeded undefended.
5. The Court made orders on 11 November 2025 as they appear at the commencement of these reasons. These reasons for judgment support the making of those orders the orders dismissed the husband's Initiating Application for Final Orders filed 2 May 2023 (as amended by the Amended Initiating Application for Final Orders filed 7 June 2023) and otherwise made orders in the terms of final orders as sought by the mother and consented to by the ICL.
6. This matter had a long history of family violence.

(1) the mother's affidavit filed 4 November 2025;

(2) the mother's Amended Response filed 3 November 2025;

(3) Family Report prepared by Ms G dated 22 September 2025.

(4) Information sharing documents produced by Victoria and Queensland Police and Department of Families, Fairness and Housing, pursuant to ss 67ZBD and 67ZBE of the Act.

(1) Outline of Case filed 7 November 2025.

(2) Information sharing documents produced by Queensland Children, Youth Justice & Multicultural Affairs, Victoria and Queensland Police and Department of Families, Fairness and Housing, pursuant to ss 67ZBD, 67ZBE and 69ZW of the Act; and

(3) Family Report prepared by Ms G dated 22 September 2025.

1. In 1975, the father was born. At the time of trial, the father was 49 years of age. The father is self-employed and operates his own business.
2. In 1990, the mother was born. At the time of trial, the mother was 34 years of age and engaged in home duties. The mother was previously known under a different name but changed her name due to safety reasons.
3. In February 2013, the mother was in a transport accident in which she sustained injury and consequently had to undergo major surgery.
4. In 2014, the mother's son to another relationship, D, was born.
5. In June 2018, the parties met in Melbourne after months of communicating via Instagram. At this time, the father was residing in Brisbane and the mother resided in City H with D. They commenced their relationship shortly thereafter.
6. When the parties commenced their de facto relationship, the father was still married to his ex‑wife. The father has four children from his relationship with his ex-wife, three of whom are adults and one is in his teenage years.
7. In November 2018, the mother relocated to Queensland with her son, D, to further her relationship with the father. The father, at this time, was still in a relationship with his ex-wife, of which the mother was unaware.
8. Shortly after relocating to Queensland, the mother discovered the father's ongoing relationship with his wife, which caused issues in the relationship of the parties.
9. In November 2018, the mother received a total impairment lump sum compensation payment of $340,000 for her injuries as sustained in the 2013 transport accident. When the father learnt of this payment, he insisted that he and the mother use these funds to meet their daily living expenses and to fund the father's overseas holidays for himself to Country J, and for trips within Australia. The father took control of these funds and did not consult the mother about how he spent the funds. He dissipated the totality of the funds.
10. In February 2019, the mother secured a rental property in Suburb K, Queensland. The father regularly stayed at this accommodation.
11. In April 2019, the mother made her first attempt to end her relationship with the father, due to controlling and threatening behaviours towards her. The mother was intimidated by the father's behaviour once he learned of her decision to end the relationship, and she feared for both her and D's safety. Shortly thereafter, the father broke into her rental property when she was not home and left numerous sticky notes around the house with threatening messages on them. The father had also folded all her underwear and laid it on the bed.
12. Following the above incident, the mother left the rental property and stayed with a friend for approximately three weeks. The father started harassing her neighbours and family for her whereabouts. The father sent her messages stating that he knew where she was. She then discovered a tracker on her motor vehicle. The mother was aware that the father had also tracked the vehicle of his ex-wife.
13. When the parties' relationship resumed. The father permanently moved into the mother's rental property in Suburb K. The mother deposed that the father's controlling behaviours became extreme. He would control what she wore; what she ate; whom she spoke with; and what money she had available to her. The father did not allow her to talk to anyone on the phone unless he was present and did not allow her to spend time with anyone other than the father or unless he was present.
14. In February 2020, the parties moved into a property in Suburb L, Queensland, with D and the maternal grandmother. The property was owned by the mother's family.
15. Between February 2020 and March 2021, the parties' relationship continued to be a very toxic one. As the mother deposed in her affidavit evidence:[1]

I tried to leave the relationship on numerous occasions however, once again, [the father] became abusive and threatening towards me and I ended up feeling so intimidated by his behaviours that it was easier to stay with him, as I knew what to expect from him.

1. In March 2021, the parties separated. The father thereafter commenced a relationship with another woman, Ms M.
2. In April 2021, the father contacted the mother, and he sought that they reconcile. The father told the mother that his relationship with Ms M ended. The father moved into an apartment in Suburb N, Queensland. The mother agreed to move into the apartment with him to repair their relationship. The mother's child, D was also in the household.
3. Thereafter, in April 2021, the parties resumed cohabitation. The parties cohabitated in Suburb N until November 2021.
4. In mid-2021, the mother became pregnant.
5. In October 2021, the mother received a further compensation lump sum payment of $215,000 from the Transport Accident Commission, Victoria, and the father again took control of these funds. Upon receipt of the monies, the father held a meeting at which the father, the mother, and two of the father's associates, who are now serving time in prison, attended. During the meeting, the father demanded that the mother forthwith transfer the monies as received by her to his associates, for "his business activities".[2] The mother complied. The parties relied on the mother's compensation payments to support themselves and the child, with day-to-day expenses, rent, and travel.
6. In 2021, when the mother was six months pregnant, the mother discovered that the father was having an affair with Ms M. She suffered an emotional breakdown. The mother sent the father a text message that she was holding a knife. The father called the police who attended the home with an ambulance. The police took out an Interim Protection Order against the mother, naming the father as the aggrieved person.
7. The parties thereafter separated on a final basis.
8. In December 2021, the mother moved out of the Suburb N apartment and began residing with the maternal grandmother. The father began cohabiting with Ms M and her two young sons. The parties remained in contact at this time.
9. In 2022, the parties' child, X (the child), was born. The mother contacted the father to inform him of the birth. The father did not attend the birth due to a positive test for COVID-19. The maternal grandmother supported the mother at the birth. At the time of trial, the child was three years old.
10. Following the birth of the child, the father did not contact the mother. The father met the child when the child was approximately five weeks old. The father did not provide any financial support, nor did he assist with meeting any of the needs of the child. The mother agreed for the father to have some contact with the child, as she felt it was important for the child.
11. Following the child's birth, the mother submitted his birth registration online. The father supplied the mother with his identification, and the mother attempted to add the father to the registration. However, his identification documents were all outdated and invalid. The mother communicated this to the father when she put through the birth registration with her sole details online. The mother requested that the father update his identification documents to enable her to then add him to the birth certificate. The father did not do so.
12. In March 2022, the maternal grandmother's rental property was placed on the market for sale. The mother did not have the financial capacity to fund private rental accommodation in Region E.
13. The mother advised the father that she intended to return to City H, Victoria. The father consented to this decision, provided that the mother keep him informed as to the child's progress.
14. In March 2022, the mother arrived in City H. She resided with D and X in her sister's home. During this time, the mother provided updates about X to the father.
15. In July 2022, the parties spent time together with D and X in Town O, Victoria.
16. In November 2022, the mother travelled to Region E to spend time with her family and ill grandfather. The mother facilitated time between X and the father.
17. In February 2023, whilst the father was driving with the mother and the two children in the car, he pushed the mother out of the car and drove away with the children. The mother contacted the police and made a report. Following this incident, the mother applied for a Protection Order against the father. The mother also had a meeting with the relevant authorities to discuss the father's alleged involvement in illegal business activities.
18. In early March 2023, the father's business premises was raided by police. Shortly after, the mother and her family received threats from the father and his business associates.
19. In 2023, the mother's grandfather passed away. The mother asked for space from the father. He however continued his stalking and harassment of her. The mother discovered a further tracker on her car and made a report to police.
20. On 23 April 2023, the father attended the mother's grandfather's property without the family's knowledge or consent.
21. On 30 April 2023, the father attended the maternal aunt's residence asking for the mother's whereabouts.
22. On 2 May 2023, the father filed an Initiating Application in which he sought final parenting orders.
23. In mid-2023, the mother read a news article which named the father as being involved in a crime.
24. In July 2023, the mother appeared before the Magistrates' Court for her breaches of a Protection Order because of her messaging Ms M. She received a fine without conviction.
25. In July 2023, the mother was visited by the police to whom she disclosed alleged illegal activities of the father.
26. In August 2023, the mother returned to live in Region E with her mother in Suburb Q.
27. In early September 2023, police notified the mother of the seriousness of the father's alleged criminal activities. The mother was advised to relocate.
28. In mid-September 2023, the mother attended B Contact Centre, a supervised contact centre, for the purpose of the spend time arrangements between the child and the father as agreed between the parties. There were three visits that took place in total. The mother deposed that, as the father was leaving on the last visit, he drove past her on his motor bike and raised his hand in the shape of a gun and pointed it at her. The mother thereafter ceased the supervised spend time between X and the father.
29. The day after in September 2023, the mother contacted the Domestic Violence Prevention Centre in Queensland about the incident at B Contact Centre, and a safety plan was actioned.
30. The following day in September 2023, the mother and her children were placed into emergency accommodation.
31. In late September 2023, the mother and her children arrived at their safe location in Victoria.
32. On 12 and 13 August 2023, the Family Report writer conducted interviews.
33. On 8 October 2025, the father's lawyers, R Lawyers, filed a Notice of Ceasing to Act.

1. Parental responsibility is dealt with in Division 2 of Pt VIII of the Act. Relevantly, s 61CA of the Act provides as follows:

Consultation between parents on major long - term issues

If it is safe to do so, and subject to any court orders, the parents of a child who is not yet 18 are encouraged:

(a) to consult each other about major long - term issues in relation to the child; and

(b) in doing so, to have regard to the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration.

(Emphasis in original)

1. Relevantly, s 61D of the Act provides as follows:

Parenting orders and parental responsibility

(1) A parenting order confers parental responsibility for a child on a person, but only to the extent to which the order confers on the person duties, powers, responsibilities or authority in relation to the child.

(2) A parenting order in relation to a child does not take away or diminish any aspect of the parental responsibility of any person for the child except to the extent (if any):

(a) expressly provided for in the order; or

(b) necessary to give effect to the order.

(3) A parenting order that deals with the allocation of responsibility for making decisions about major long - term issues in relation to the child (see subsection 64B(3)) may provide for joint or sole decision - making in relation to all or specified major long - term issues.

In deciding whether to make a particular parenting order in relation to a child, a court must regard the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration.

1. To determine the best interests of the child, I must have regard to the considerations in the Act as set out in ss 60CC(1), 60CC(2) and 60CC(2A) of the Act. Those sections provide, relevantly:

How a court determines what is in a child's best interests

...

(1) ...in determining what is in the child's best interests, the court must:

(a) consider the matters set out in subsection (2);

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a), the court must consider the following matters:

(a) what arrangements would promote the safety (including safety from being subjected to, or exposed to, family violence, abuse, neglect, or other harm) of:

(i) the child; and

(ii) each person who has care of the child (whether or not a person has parental responsibility for the child);

(b) any views expressed by the child;

(c) the developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs of the child;

(d) the capacity of each person who has or is proposed to have parental responsibility for the child to provide for the child's developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs;

(e) the benefit to the child of being able to have a relationship with the child's parents, and other people who are significant to the child, where it is safe to do so;

(f) anything else that is relevant to the particular circumstances of the child.

(2A) In considering the matters set out in paragraph (2)(a), the court must include consideration of:

(a) any history of family violence, abuse or neglect involving the child or a person caring for the child (whether or not the person had parental responsibility for the child); and

(b) any family violence order that applies or has applied to the child or a member of the child's family.

(Emphasis in original)

1. When considering the risk of family violence, the following is set out in s 60CG of the Act:

(1) In considering what order to make, the court must, to the extent that it is possible to do so consistently with the child's best interests being the paramount consideration, ensure that the order:

(a) is consistent with any family violence order; and

(b) does not expose a person to an unacceptable risk of family violence.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(b), the court may include in the order any safeguards that it considers necessary for the safety of those affected by the order.

1. In considering these matters, the Court must give consideration as to whether there is an unacceptable risk of family violence and/or an inability to promote the safety of a child and parent in the making of parenting orders also involving a consideration of unacceptable risk. Upon establishing the existence of an unacceptable risk, the Court must then determine whether that risk "is able to be sufficiently managed or ameliorated".[3]
2. The Court is required to assess its factual findings on the balance of probabilities, and the impact of those findings upon the assessment of future risk. Accordingly, Isles & Nelissen [2022] FedCFamC1A 97; (2022) 65 Fam LR 288 is applicable. The Court's determination as to what did or did not happen in the past is determined on the balance of probabilities. However, in hypothesising about future possibilities the Court is required to engage in an assessment of risk as a predictive exercise.[4] That assessment of risk is informed by the factual findings as to the past.

1. The Court finds that parental responsibility in relation to long-term issues for the child must lie with the mother; the child must live with the mother; and the child shall spend no time with the father. These conclusions are so because the child's best interests are promoted by the making of orders to produce this outcome. Such orders, in the factual context of this matter, are also the only orders which promote the safety of the child and the mother.
2. The mother and child are at an unacceptable risk of further family violence being perpetrated against them by the father. That risk is clear on the evidence and the history of the parties' relationship. There is no evidence before the Court that would suggest any means by which that unacceptable risk can be ameliorated.
3. The father failed to prosecute his Initiating Application. He put no probative material before the Court including any denial of the matters as raised by the mother and which the Court makes findings in relation to, there being no challenge to the mother's evidence. The father seeks no final parenting orders.
4. The Family Report writer, the single expert in the proceeding, whose evidence is accepted by the Court, opined (in her Family Report) the following in relation to the above considerations:

The family violence allegations and the impact on [the mother's]'s emotional and mental wellbeing suggests that her capacity to share joint decision-making responsibility with [Mr Dufour] is significantly impaired. Additionally, [the father]'s capacity to compromise when decisions are required and in dispute appears questionable. [The mother] being required to have direct communication with [the father] could further compromise her emotional wellbeing and mental health and, in turn, impact on her parenting".

If [the mother's] account is accepted, [the father]'s deliberate and pervasive actions to belittle, monitor, intimidate, threaten, harm and control [the mother] is not reflective of a safe or responsive caregiver. Any such behaviour would likely have had harmful emotional impacts on [the mother] and on [X's] emotional wellbeing and functioning should he have continued to be exposed to it. The information gathered in this assessment suggests a lack of responsibility or acknowledgement on [the father's] part that [the mother's] has been hindered in her parenting role and adversely impacted by his pattern of coercive controlling family violence behaviour toward her.

[The father] has described himself as traditional and as someone who prefers to maintain control within the family, including taking a dominant role in financial matters. He has indicated that this parenting approach aligns with his personal values and it does not appear that he has expressed an intention to change these behaviours. From [Mr Dufour's] perspective, he is a father who acts with good intention and he wants the best for his children. However, having a controlling and authoritarian style can have adverse impacts on children, who may feel fearful, anxious or constrained in expressing themselves freely. [Mr Dufour's] emphasis on asserting authority and presenting himself as a dominant figure would significantly affect the emotional climate of the home and shape how any of his children view and experience him as a father, as well as their sense of security, safety and autonomy.

There appears to be a significant risk of [X's] exposure to family violence in his care, should [X] start spending substantial time with [the father] or in fact transition into his primary care, according to [the father]'s parenting proposal. As outlined, it is not evident that [the father] views his behaviour and actions as constituting family violence or that he needs to change his behaviour which could place [X] directly and indirectly at risk...

1. The father has not spent time with the child since late 2023, when the child was an infant. That is a period exceeding two years.
2. The child is now three years of age and is too young to express his views and wishes. He may not recall the father.
3. There is no evidence to suggest that the mother lacks capacity to care for the child and adequately meet the child's needs. She has been the child's only caregiver for many years and on the evidence has advanced all his needs, including his developmental, physical, financial, emotional, and intellectual needs.
4. The Court accedes to the application of the mother as supported by the ICL.

I certify that the preceding seventy-two (72) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Hartnett.

[1] Mother's affidavit filed 5 November 2025, paragraph 23.

[2] Mother's affidavit filed 5 November 2025, paragraph 27.

[3] Blinko & Blinko [2015] FamCAFC 146 at [83] referring to Russell & Close [1993] FamCA 62.

[4] Isles & Nelissen [2022] FedCFamC1A 97; (2022) 65 Fam LR 288 at [50].