Event and Time
Event Description
This case involves an appeal regarding parenting orders made by Judge Altobelli on July 27, 2016. The appeal was filed by the father, Mr. Marriott, against findings of unacceptable risk and orders for supervised contact with his child due to concerns regarding his past criminal behavior including sexual offences.
Application and Claims
- The father sought:
- Equal shared parental responsibility. - Unsupervised contact with the child. - A modification in existing arrangements, such as increased time spent with the child.
- The mother, Ms. Draper, and the Independent Children’s Lawyer contended:
- That the father posed an unacceptable risk of harm to the child due to his history of sexual offending. - Their emphasis was on the potential psychological impact and actual risk to the child from unsupervised contact.
Judicial Decisions
The Full Court dismissed the father’s appeal, citing the following:
- The primary judge’s findings on unacceptable risk were open based on evidence.
- Expert reports were not determinative and could be assessed in light of comprehensive evidence.
- No appealable errors were identified regarding the decisions made by the primary judge.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Father's Arguments:
- The primary judge erred in concluding there was an unacceptable risk of harm based on the evidence. - Insufficient weight was given to expert opinions (Dr. D and Ms. C) stating he represented a low risk of reoffending. - Other orders should have been considered to allow for more contact.
- Mother’s and Children’s Lawyer's Arguments:
- The father’s past sexual offences created significant risk factors necessitating supervised contact. - The father had previously withheld important information from professionals, impacting the validity of expert assessments. - The tenuous nature of the father-child relationship necessitated limited and supervised contact for the child’s best interests.