Dowling & McLeod [2016] FCCA 2785 (28 October 2016)

Ms Rothschild acted for the applicant father. Phipps J made orders that it is in the child’s best interest to live with respondent, for the respondent to have sole parental responsibility and for the child to have time spent with the father.
Dokic & Jamenev [2016] FamCA 732 (1 September 2016)

Ms Rothschild acted for the respondent father. Ms Rothschild successfully satisfied Macmillan J that interim orders restraining the applicant from taking the children to any mental health practitioner were necessary, as it is important for the family consultant to make an assessment without the impact that ongoing therapy may have upon that assessment.
Roskam & Roskam [2016] FamCA 1097 (16 December 2016)

Ms Rothschild acted for the applicant father. Bennett J refused to grant leave for the applicant to make an oral application for adjournment of the final hearing.
Hunter & Hillman [2017] FamCA 597 (15 August 2017)

Ms Rothschild acted for the applicant father who sought final orders for the children to live with him and for sole parental responsibility.
Ms Rothschild successfully satisfied Johns J that it is in the child’s best interests to remain in the applicant’s care, with opportunity of spending time and communicating with the respondent and his siblings.
Petrov & Rudetsky [2017] FamCA 947 (23 November 2017)

Ms Rothschild acted for the applicant, a mother who wished to return with her child to her previous country of residence. The father opposed the mother’s application for relocation. The applicant had concerns regarding the father’s parenting capacity and the court was satisfied that there was foundation to her concerns. Macmillan J expressed preference for the applicant’s evidence.
Macmillan J considered the effects of family violence, changes in the child’s relationship with his parents and benefits of a meaningful relationships with them, the child’s circumstances and practical difficulties and expense of spending time with the father. Ms Rothschild successfully satisfied Macmillan J that it would be in the child’s best interests to relocate with the applicant.
Yates & Woodford and Ors [2018] FamCA 112 (27 February 2018)

Ms Rothschild acted for the second respondent, a father of three. The maternal grandmother of the children sought orders for sole parental responsibility of the children and alleged that the children were exposed to family violence.
Serious allegations of family violence and separation of the sibling group were factors that supported the granting of priority to this matter.