K. Bromley

The parties engaged in a high-conflict family law trial over custody and access of their two children.

The father alleged the mother was engaging in parental alienation and sought to have the children removed from her care.

A section 30 assessment found 'hybrid alienation', noting the mother contributed to the children's extreme rejection of the father, but also that the father's own rigid and obsessive behaviour played a significant role.

The court granted the mother sole custody, finding it was not in the children's best interests to be removed from her care.

The father was granted supervised access and the parties were ordered to participate in reintegration therapy at the father's primary expense.

The respondent father brought a motion under Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules, alleging the applicant mother breached various custody and access orders and seeking an order for reunification therapy with their 17-year-old son.

The mother brought a cross-motion to dismiss.

The court applied the three-part test for relief under Rule 1(8) and found no breach by the mother on a balance of probabilities.

The court further held that even if a breach had occurred, it would not order reunification therapy given the child's age, his resistance to the process, and the risk of negatively impacting his relationship with the father.

The father's motion was dismissed.