Farran & Nadim [2025] FedCFamC1F 953 (23 December 2025)

PROVIDED that the mother, at least 28 days prior to her intended travel overseas:

(a) informs the father in writing of the travel itinerary for the child;

(b) provides the father with copies of return flight tickets; and

(c) informs the father in writing of her contact information including mobile phone numbers, email addresses, and street addresses for each location where the child will be staying during the travel.

1. Neither party shall denigrate or criticise the other party in the presence or within the hearing of the child and shall not allow other people to denigrate or criticise the other party within the presence or hearing of the child.

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 Farran & Nadim has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

1. The parties are the parents of one child, X, who will attain 13 years this year.
2. The parties have previously litigated about the care arrangements for X, resulting in orders made by Harman J on 14 October 2016 which, in substance, provided for the child to live with the mother and spend time with the father each alternate weekend and during school holiday periods.
3. The parties also entered into consent orders at that time which provided:

By consent and pursuant to section 61C of the Family Law Act 1975, each of the parents, [Mr Nadim] and [Ms Farran], shall have parental responsibility for the child, [X] born [2012], at such times as she is in their respective care.

1. Section 61C relevantly provides that "Each of the parents of a child who is not 18 has parental responsibility for the child". It cannot be that this Order is meant to apply to long term issues as it would be unworkable. Rather, the Order appears to be an infelicitous order for sharing parental responsibility for day to day issues.
2. The current proceedings were commenced by the mother as she wished to relocate with the child to Country B and this was opposed by the father. Ultimately the mother did not press for orders permitting relocation, but did press for the orders providing for the child to have time with the father to be discharged and for orders for sole parental responsibility.

1. The parties married in Country C in 2011 and commenced cohabitation soon after. In 2012, X was born.
2. In 2014 they separated on a final basis. They were divorced in 2016.
3. Difficulties with respect to the father spending time with the child emerged early in the separation and were resolved by the orders of 14 October 2016.
4. Whilst the father had the benefit of orders for weekend time with the child each second weekend, large periods of time passed without the father seeing the child. Movement records from the Department of Home Affairs show that the father was outside of Australia for considerable periods between 2017 and 2024 (when the records were subpoenaed). A schedule of those periods was prepared by the solicitor for the applicant and accepted as being correct by the respondent. That schedule showed as follows:

Arrival - means arrival to Australia

Departure - means departure from Australia

Arrival - [...]/03/2024

Departure - [...]/12/2023

Arrival - [...]/09/2023

Departure - [...]/01/2023

Arrival | [...]/11/2022 |

Departure | [...]/03/2022

Arrival - [...]/11/2021

Departure - [...]/11/2020

Arrival [...]/06/2019

Departure [...]/03/2019

Arrival [...]/09/2018

Departure [...]/07/2018

Arrival [...]/09/2017

Departure [...]/07/2017

1. The father explained that his absences were due to his relationship with his current wife in Country D, with whom he has a child. Whilst the father points out in his affidavit filed 26 October 2023 (at paragraphs 24-27) that he was in Country D for an extended period of time between 2022 to 2023 for the birth of his second child, this does not provide an explanation for his year abroad in Country D between November 2020 to November 2021.
2. The father's travel records indicate that he has, in the last eight years, spent a considerable amount of time overseas with great frequency. This points to a significant change of circumstances for X as it has impacted on X's opportunity to develop an ongoing and stable relationship with her father. Accordingly, the report writer described the contact between the child and the father as "intermittent" and "sporadic" due to the father's regular travel to Country D (Family Report of 16 May 2025 at paragraph 47).
3. In his affidavit (at paragraph 23), the father says that whilst he was in Country D, his family would care for X in Australia, particularly the paternal grandmother. Time spent in the care of extended family is not a substitute for developing and nurturing a child's relationship with a parent.
4. When I made directions for the trial of this matter, I raised with the solicitors for the mother the need for some evidence as to her ability to obtain a visa, residency permit, or citizenship in Country B, if she sought to relocate a 12-year-old child.
5. When the matter first came on for final hearing in August 2025, no such evidence was provided. During cross examination by the father, the mother agreed that she did not have residency rights in Country B nor that she held a visa. She explained she was going to make enquiries regarding eligibility for a visa or residence permit before she went to Country B but was unable to provide any detail as to the type of visa or her prospects of obtaining a visa, other than a tourist visa, to enter Country B. She confirmed that she did have a sister in Sydney and a sister in Country C in addition to family members who live in Country B. In re-examination she said that she hadn't checked about a visa yet as she had too much to manage at that time.
6. After I raised with the solicitors for the mother the question of whether or not a court could conclude that it was in a child's best interest to relocate to another country without any evidence of visas or residency rights (and therefore face the real prospect of becoming an illegal immigrant in the other country), the solicitor sought an adjournment of the trial. Given that this was the central issue in the case, I adjourned the matter for two months to allow the mother to obtain evidence as to her and the child's entitlements to visas or residency permits (or equivalent).
7. When the matter came before me on the last occasion the mother's application to relocate with the child to Country B was not pursued, there still being no evidence of her ability to obtain a visas or residency rights in Country B. I was simply told from the bar table that her prospects in that regard may improve once she obtains Australian citizenship.
8. At this point, the main issues in the case became whether the existing spend time with orders should remain in place, and whether the orders with respect to parental responsibility ought to be altered.
9. The father was briefly cross examined. He maintained that he views Australia as his main home and that his extended periods in Country D were the result of his relationship with his wife and child. He said that he is hoping to obtain a spouse visa for his wife but has not been able to do so yet.
10. In his evidence he first said that he had not left Australia since 2024, however when shown a letter from his solicitor which referred to a need to await his return, he then admitted that he had been overseas for three months and only returned to Australia nine months ago. As a result, I do not place great weight on the reliability of his evidence.
11. There was no direct criticism of the father concerning the fact that he went overseas to spend time with his current wife and their child. Rather, the relevance of his overseas travel is the impact that it may have had upon his relationship with X.
12. There were two family reports prepared by a court child expert, Ms E, one on 10 September 2024 and an updated report on 16 May 2025. Ms E was not required for cross examination by the parties. The earlier report addressed the nature of the child's relationship with the father setting out:
    1. The writer asked [X] about her memories with her father. She said she has not seen him since she was 9 or 10 years of age. She said that when she used to visit her father that she would go to the paternal grandmother's home and that her father was sometimes not there and overseas when she visited with his new wife and children. She said that sometimes she would talk to him online and her father would lie to her about his new wife. She said that she asked him ' ... why are you lying to me?' and that her father was mad with her but that she just wanted to know the truth as she could hear children in the background of the phone call.
    2. [X] recollected when she saw her father when he returned from overseas, he had given her a gift that was a pair of underpants that did not fit her, and she felt through his gift he did not really know her. She said ' .. . he just gives me junk ... '
    3. [X] said that when she used to stay with her paternal grandparents, she noticed that her paternal uncle was mean towards the grandparents and that he hit her grandmother. She also said her paternal grandmother said negative things about her mother to her. She said that her mother was kind about them and said that they are her family so to try and get along, but that she felt uncomfortable when staying with them. [X] recollected asking her father to take her to the park and that he would dismiss her and say that he was busy or too tired, so she formed the impression that he had no time for her. [X] said that when her father was phoning his wife, he would tell her to go to a different room and that she was not sure if his new wife knew about her.
    4. [X] also shared that her father had referred to her as ' ... fat .... ' and always commented on how much food she ate. She said that this had made her feel uncomfortable and nervous about eating when she visited him.
    5. [X] was asked by the writer about her father's involvement in school events and activities over the years. [X] said that he never has attended her school and that he is always overseas.

...

1. [X] is nearing 13 years of age and very much presents in the adolescent stage of development. This is evident in her articulate expression of views and emotions and the development of strong views about her father, her interests, and her wishes. She is both confident and forthright in her expression of views. She presents as supportive and protective of her mother making a point of expressing a view that her mother had always tried to push and support her to spend time with her Dad and that she had formed her own views about not wanting to see her father and seems to have formed a strong view that her father is now preventing her and her mother from visiting her grandparents in [Country B]. [X] does have extensive knowledge of the legal process and the orders her mother is seeking. She appears to be increasingly aware of her mother's negative experiences and struggles and this knowledge had strengthened their alignment and developed protective instincts in [X] towards her mother.
2. As it has been over 18 months since [X] has seen her father, there have not been enough fulfilling experiences recently between [X] and her father for her to see the positives or benefits of a relationships with her father. She is currently expressing her anger and sadness towards him that may be hard to shift at this point in time. The father and [X's] relationship have deteriorated since the mother began to approach the father about visiting overseas and potentially relocating. [X] is acutely aware of both the Court proceedings and the need for her father's consent to enable her to travel with her mother. [X] can observe how this impacts on her mother and the disappointment she experiences as a result.

1. As a result of this the report writer, at paragraph 43, recommended that X live with her mother that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child.
2. The updated report contains considerable detail across 17 pages and provided X's more recent views about her father:
   1. [X] stated said that she does not call [ Mr Nadim] 'Dad' and if she does speak about him, she refers to him by his first name. She said that she does not remember the last time she saw him and that it was a ' ...longtime ago .... ' She said ' ...I don't want anything to do with him ... he has his own family .... ' She said she does not know what [Mr Nadim's] living situation is but that he knows he has a wife but that she is not sure if he has more children. She said she has no contact with him, and she understands from her mother that he has not reached out to see her. [X] began refusing to spend time with her father around two years ago. The main reasons she stopped seeing him were disclosed during the previous interview and included being exposed to conflict in the paternal home, feeling uncomfortable, her father teasing her about her weight and that he would. never pay an attention to her. She also mentioned his new family and felt that he may not care about her anymore.
   2. [X] restated several times she did not want to see her father and that she finds it hard to ' ... remember this stuff... ' and that she just wants to move on with her mother to [Country B]. She re-iterated information during her last interview that she still remembers her paternal family would fight when she would visit, that sometimes her father was not there, that her uncles made fun of her and that she would ring her mother and ask her to come and pick her up early.
   3. The writer asked [X] what she knew about [Country B]. She said that she had been told that it was a beautiful place and that her grandparents, aunties, uncles, and cousins are all there. She said that she looks up to her mother as she is a 'strong person,' and she believes that it is the better for her mother and herself to move to [Country B]. [X] said her extended family show her what [Country B] is like in photographs and video calls. She said she is just waiting to find out when she can go.
3. The report writer went on to say in the evaluation section that:
   1. As it has been over two years since [X] has seen her father. There appears -to be few fulfilling experiences recently between [X] and her father for her to see the positives or benefits of a relationships with her father. She remains feeling angry and sad towards him. The parents' relationship appears to have deteriorated to no communication. The mother attributing this breakdown to the father making it difficult for her to travel oversea, the father attributing this to the timeframe of his new relationship and birth of [F]. [X] is observing how this impacts on her mother and the disappointment she experiences because of not being able to visit her family or make plans to move to [Country B] to be closer to the maternal grandparents. In the context of separation children may resist or refuse to see a parent and the factors are multifaceted. If [X's] account is to be accepted after five years of spending fortnightly and school holiday time with him she has formed a firm view that she not longer wants to spend time, there. While this could be realistic estrangement, the timeline for the refusal does parallel with the mother's decision to pursue moving overseas and the birth of [F], who [X] is not yet formally aware of.
   2. The potential moving to [Country B] is exciting to [X] and this change is also something that the mother is seeking so they are both expressing strong desires that this could be a wonderful opportunity for them to improve both their quality of life, cultural exposure, and future opportunities. It is also viewed as an opportunity that could increase the mothers access to family and financial supports and resources. The father sees it as preventing [X's] access to a future in Australia and severing any opportunity for him to have a role in her life moving forward. It will also reduce [X's]'s access to the paternal family and less opportunity for her to meet and build a relationship with [F].
4. The report writer again recommended that X live with her mother, and that the mother have sole decision-making power with respect to the child.
5. Whilst the report writer was positive with respect to the proposal to move the child to Country B, she must not have explored the immigration issues during interviews. It is entirely understandable that the report writer would have assumed that there were no visa issues where a parent is proposing to relocate overseas with a child.
6. The family report writer identifies a number of reasons which are likely to have led to the child's estrangement from the father, not least of which is his absence from the child's life for extended periods, and the circumstances and events that have taken place in his household.
7. In the time that this litigation has been pending, the father has not sought interim orders to see the child, nor has he sought to engage with the child in reunification therapy in order to attempt to improve his relationship with her, nor taken any other active steps. It does not appear that he has attempted to send gifts or cards to her (at the very least, through the mother's solicitor's office) in the intervening period.
8. It also appears that a significant factor in the child's negative views of the father is the child's perception that the father has been the reason that she is unable to relocate to Country B with her mother. Superficially, this is true, as the father opposed the relocation. However, it is apparent that the relocation was not properly considered by the mother and would have potentially left the child as an illegal immigrant in a foreign country. That the mother allowed the child to become excited about relocating and believe that the father's resistance was the main hinderance to them moving to Country B does not reflect well on her parenting capacity.
9. It is remarkable that the mother had made no inquiries as to visa arrangements in circumstances where neither her, nor the child were citizens or had residency rights in Country B. The relocation to Country B was a mere desire or wish by the mother without any investigation or planning.
10. On the evidence before the Court, the proposed relocation could not have taken place regardless of the father's opposition to it. Worse, it appears to me there was a real risk that the mother would have taken the child to Country B, and simply, 'hoped for the best', in attempting to obtain a visa or remaining as an illegal immigrant. This could not possibly have been in the best interest of the child.

1. In deciding whether the current parenting orders should be revisited, s 65DAAA requires:

(1) If a final parenting order is in force in relation to a child, a court must not reconsider the final parenting order unless:

(a) the court has considered whether there has been a significant change of circumstances since the final parenting order was made; and

(b) the court is satisfied that, in all the circumstances (and taking into account whether there has been a significant change of circumstances since the final parenting order was made), it is in the best interests of the child for the final parenting order to be reconsidered

1. s 65DAAA(2) of the Act requires that consideration must be given to the factors outlined in s 60CC. In addition to s 60CC, additional relevant factors under s 65DAAA can include:

(a) the reasons for the final parenting order and the material on which it was based;

(b) whether there is any material available that was not available to the court that made the final parenting order;

(c) the likelihood that, if the final parenting order is reconsidered, the court will make a new parenting order that affects the operation of the final parenting order in a significant way (whether by varying, discharging or suspending the final parenting order, in whole or in part, or in some other way);

(d) any potential benefit, or detriment, to the child that might result from reconsidering the final parenting order.

1. In Radecki & Radecki [2024] FedCFamC1A 246; (2024) FLC 94-232 the Full Court considered the operation of this provision. Whilst s 65DAA(1)(a) uses the word "consider" the Full Court (after considering the previous law as set out in Rice and Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725, at 78, 905 and the narrower explanation in the Explanatory Memorandum to the amending Act) held that a "significant change of circumstances" is a mandatory requirement saying:

[79] We therefore conclude, for the purposes of s 65DAAA(1) of the Act, and having regard to the principles espoused in Rice and Asplund and subsequent authority, the proper interpretation of "consider" should not be a literal one. The word "consider" in s 65DAAA should be construed to mean the Court is required to contemplate the evidence and to make findings of fact as to what changes in circumstances (if any) there have been since the making of the anterior parenting orders. If there is no positive finding of changed circumstances, that is the end of the matter. If there is a positive finding as to changed circumstances, the second stage of the process requires the Court to make its determination, subject to the overarching best interests principle, as prescribed by s 65DAAA(1)(b) and otherwise having regard to relevant s 60CC considerations and the matters referred to in s 65DAAA(2).

1. In this case, the orders the subject of litigation were made by consent. As Evatt CJ pointed out in Rice and Asplund, the requirement of a change of circumstances prior to exercising judicial power applies regardless of "whether the original order is made by consent or after a contested hearing" (at 78, 906).
2. As there are existing final orders in place from 2016, the Court can only make a variation to those orders if satisfied of the matters set out in s 65DAAA.
3. In this case, I am satisfied that there has been a significant change in circumstances since the final parenting order was made, namely, that there have been lengthy absences of the father from the child's life, and the child has now become so estranged from the father that she refuses to see him.
4. I am satisfied that it is in the best interests of the child that the previous parenting order be reconsidered as the order makes provision for time with the father that is not occurring, has not occurred for some time, and is unlikely to occur in the foreseeable future. It is not in the child's best interests that orders remain in force where, though events since the orders were made, the orders have become unworkable.
5. Given the child's current attitude to the father, it is unrealistic to leave in place orders that the child spend second weekends with the father, as this time has not occurred for at least two years and is unlikely to resume in the form that the Court had previously ordered. Given the current circumstances of the relationship, it could not be in the child's best interest to attempt to force her to commence spending second weekends with the father, without any form of reunification with the father in order to rekindle the relationship. That the father thought this was a realistic proposition, despite being largely absent from the child's life for so long, reflects poorly on his parenting capacity.
6. On the material currently before the Court, the only realistic prospect for the father to have a relationship with the child is by him providing letters, cards and gifts, and attempting to recommence some form of contact with the child electronically, at least until the child is prepared to reengage with him. The mother was agreeable to orders to that effect and provided the child's mobile phone number to the father so that he was able to send her messages, should he wish to do so to attempt to rekindle his relationship with the child.
7. I am satisfied that the mother has established a significant change of circumstances within the meaning of s 65DAAA of the Family Law Act 1975 and that it is in the best interests of the child to consider different orders.
8. I turn to consider what orders are in the child's best interests. Section 60CC sets out the relevant considerations.
9. In this matter I have regard to the importance of promoting the safety of the child, and protecting her from family violence, abuse, neglect or other harm. There is a risk of psychological harm to the child in the father's household, given her reports of witnessing family violence and being teased concerning her weight. There are also concerns with respect to the mother's capacity concerning long-term decisions with respect to the child, given her proposal to move to Country B without inquiries with respect to visas.
10. The child's views are set out in the material quoted above from the family report writer. It is clear that at this stage the child has a firm view about not wishing to see the father, and on the evidence that view is not simply capricious but based upon events that form a rational basis for the child reaching that conclusion. I note that the child is nearly 13 and entering her teenage years. She appears to be well-settled and doing well at school. Given her age and the events that have led her to form the views that she has, considerable weight must be placed upon her views in the context of this case. I am mindful, however, that as a child of only 12 years of age, she is unlikely to have significant insight into the long-term importance of maintaining family relationships.
11. I have already commented upon the capacity of the parents. There are considerable questions about the father's capacity to maintain a meaningful relationship with the child. The father appears to have made no real efforts to sustain the relationship electronically when he has been absent from the country for lengthy periods. Nor has he taken active steps to find pathways to repair the relationship now that he has returned to Australia. With respect to the mother, as I have set out above, her desire to relocate herself and X to a foreign country before identifying a legal basis for remaining there shows a lack of insight.
12. It is clear that the child's relationship with the mother is important and will continue.
13. It is important that the child has some ongoing relationship with the paternal family, however that relationship is fractured and will require adult intervention to repair it. That is, the father will need to take steps as the adult in the adult-child relationship to commence a course of interaction with the child so as to attempt to repair his and his family's relationship with her. He has not done so prior to the hearing.
14. The parties were agreed that the child live with the mother. The mother was also agreeable to the father having liberty to send items such as cards and gifts, emails or text messages to the child without restriction, and for the parties to keep each other informed with respect to their residential address, mobile phone numbers and email addresses. The parties agreed upon a number of other orders facilitating information exchange between the child's school and the father and orders to facilitate medical information exchange. The parties agreed that there should be orders restraining each of them from denigrating or criticising the other in the presence or hearing of the child or allowing other people to do likewise.
15. I turn then to the issues in dispute by the end of the hearing. First, I am not persuaded that the mother ought to be granted sole decision-making authority with respect to the child, having regard to the ill-conceived proposal by her to relocate to Country B. It appears that there are no other significant decisions that are likely to be necessary in the foreseeable future, as the child is in good health and attending high school. A requirement to consult with the father with respect to significant long-term decisions provides at least some mechanism for reflection upon decisions the mother might make. In the circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that the parties, at least by electronic means, can communicate sufficiently for there to be joint parental responsibility. I will make such an order pursuant to s 64B(2)(c). I am also persuaded to make an order that the mother, before making any major or long-term decision concerning the child consult in writing (by email or text message) with the father so that he may intervene if he believes that the needs be.
16. Having regard to the current nature of the relationship between the father and the child, and the lack of any practical alternative proposal, I am persuaded to discharge the orders providing for the child to spend time with the child and instead make orders for the child to spend time with the father in accordance with her wishes. The mother does not oppose an order that she facilitate the child maintaining contact with the father including by video calls, emails and electronic messages and visits in accordance with the child's wishes. I will therefore make such an order.
17. The father maintained his preparedness to consent to the child travelling internationally for holidays (which would enable her to visit family in Country B) provided that he was given notice of the itinerary, copies by way of confirmation of return air tickets and other details of her travel arrangements and contact arrangements whilst she would be outside of the country, at least 28 days prior to her intended dates of travel. At the hearing he also agreed that she could travel up to seven days on either side of the school holiday period (provided she missed no more than 10 days of school per annum) in order to assist the mother to be able to purchase more economical airline tickets. I will make orders in those terms to permit the child to child to travel to see family.

1. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that the orders proposed both by consent and as determined by me are in the best interests of the child.

I certify that the preceding fifty-two (52) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Riethmuller.