Father Opposes Mother's Application to Relocate
Dashwood & Mallinder [2021] FCCA 1678 (16 June 2021)
The parties are in dispute over the parenting arrangements over their child who is nine months old and whether or not the father should financially assist the mother. The mother seeks to relocate but the father opposes the same. The mother alleges that there should be financial assistance from the father due to the circumstances where the mother is the primary carer of the child, resigned from her employment and is currently paying rent of approximately $300 per week.
Facts:
The parties are in dispute about X who is nine months old. X is in the primary care of the mother. The mother was seeking to relocate to Town D in Victoria even though she has been employed and lived in Darwin for some time. The mother’s psychological state, was said to be at the heart of her need to relocate. She has resigned from her employment to care for X full-time and proposed to go to Town D where she has some family and other support.
It was suggested by counsel for the mother that the weekly rental payment for the house is $900 and therefore the mother’s share of rent would be approximately $300 per week. The father is opposing the mother’s relocation to Town D where the mother says she has access to cheap accommodation and other support. The father says that the mother's proposed arrangement will impact on his employment.
Issues:
I. Whether or not the father should financially assist the mother.
II. Whether or not the child should spend time with the father.
Applicable law:
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 60CC - provides for the means by which the Court determines what is in a child's best interests.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 61DA - provides for the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility when making parenting orders.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 65DAA - mandates the Court to consider child spending equal time or substantial and significant time with each parent in certain circumstances.
Analysis:
The father opposes the mother's relocation, as such it appears to be incumbent upon the father to make some proposal that would ease the financial burden of the mother remaining in a rental property in Darwin – a city with notoriously high rents. The father agreed to the orders sought by the mother which provide for the child to spend time with the father on Monday and Wednesday from 2:00pm to 4:00pm and on three weekends in each month from 9:00am to 1:00pm on Saturday and Sunday with changeover at E Contact Centre.
Conclusion:
The Court ordered that the father shall pay the mother $250.00 per week on a Wednesday, to be paid into the mother’s ANZ account, commencing within seven (7) days of the date of this order for her rental expenses, noting that the father is paying child support of $180.00 per week for X and that the mother will be living with her former housemates Ms B and Mr C. The Court concluded that the child should spend increased time with the father. X shall spend time with the father as agreed to between the parents from time to time in writing.
