In Brief — Impor­tance of a pre-exist­ing rela­tion­ship and the age of the child 

The deci­sion of a court about grand­par­ents and extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers spend­ing reg­u­lar time with the chil­dren after sep­a­ra­tion or divorce is like­ly to be influ­enced by the age of the chil­dren and by whether or not a rela­tion­ship already exists with the children.


Impor­tance of the rights of children

The law is for­mu­lat­ed around the rights of chil­dren. Changes to the Fam­i­ly Law Act in 2006 made it clear that chil­dren have a right to spend time and com­mu­ni­cate on a reg­u­lar basis with any per­son who is sig­nif­i­cant to their care, wel­fare and devel­op­ment, such as grand­par­ents and oth­er rel­a­tives. This is an impor­tant right, because part of the child’s iden­ti­ty stems from know­ing their grand­par­ents and extend­ed family.

Both grand­par­ents and par­ents should try not to den­i­grate oth­er mem­bers of the children’s fam­i­ly in front of the chil­dren and should be as encour­ag­ing as pos­si­ble for chil­dren to spend time with their grand­par­ents and extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers on both sides of the family.

Reach­ing an agree­ment with the parents

The best way for grand­par­ents or oth­er fam­i­ly mem­bers to ensure that they con­tin­ue to have a rela­tion­ship with a child is for the grand­par­ent or oth­er fam­i­ly mem­ber to speak direct­ly to both par­ents to dis­cuss arrange­ments. This is not always easy when there is a dif­fi­cult mar­riage break­down, but both grand­par­ents and par­ents need to keep in mind that it is the inter­ests of the chil­dren which are most important.

Grand­par­ents and extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers have access to Fam­i­ly Rela­tion­ship Cen­tres and alter­na­tive dis­pute res­o­lu­tion cen­tres to assist them in nego­ti­at­ing with par­ents to allow them to have reg­u­lar, unin­ter­rupt­ed vis­its with the children.

Inabil­i­ty to reach an agree­ment with the parents

If grand­par­ents or extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers can­not come to an arrange­ment with the par­ents, a Sec­tion 60I Cer­tifi­cate can be issued and they are then able to make an appli­ca­tion to either the Fed­er­al Mag­is­trates Court or Fam­i­ly Court to have orders made for them to see the children.

In most cir­cum­stances, the amount of time that grand­par­ents and extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers will spend with the chil­dren is not the same as it is for par­ents. How­ev­er, a court will be mind­ful of the impor­tance of grand­par­ents and extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers to chil­dren in terms of their iden­ti­ty and their lat­er rela­tion­ships with their fam­i­ly, includ­ing grand­par­ents, aunts, uncles, cousins and oth­er per­sons who have been impor­tant in their lives.

Fac­tors like­ly to influ­ence the court

The like­li­hood of a court grant­i­ng grand­par­ents or extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers the abil­i­ty to spend time with chil­dren after the fam­i­ly has sep­a­rat­ed depends part­ly on the children’s age and part­ly on the pres­ence or absence of a pre-exist­ing rela­tion­ship with the children.

In the case of an infant, the court is like­ly to take the view that it is impor­tant for the child to have the oppor­tu­ni­ty to devel­op a rela­tion­ship with mem­bers of the extend­ed fam­i­ly and to make orders accordingly.

How­ev­er, if a child is old­er and has nev­er had a rela­tion­ship with grand­par­ents or extend­ed fam­i­ly mem­bers, the court is less like­ly to make orders for the child to spend time with them.

For fur­ther infor­ma­tion please contact:

If you would like to repub­lish this arti­cle, it is gen­er­al­ly approved, but pri­or to doing so please con­tact the Mar­ket­ing team at marketing@​swaab.​com.​au. This arti­cle is not legal advice and the views and com­ments are of a gen­er­al nature only. This arti­cle is not to be relied upon in sub­sti­tu­tion for detailed legal advice.

Publications

The Paper­cut Deci­sion and the Cur­rent Posi­tion on WFH

The FWC’s John­son v Paper­Cut Soft­ware deci­sion has renewed debate about the lim­its of work­ing from home rights. While some have…

Valen­tine’s Day in the Work­place (2026 Edition)

Valentine’s Day may appear harm­less, but in work­places it can cre­ate legal and cul­tur­al risks. Even well‑meant roman­tic ges­tures can…

Aus­tralia Day Sub­sti­tu­tion: The Legal Issues (2026 Edition)

As more major employ­ers allow staff to work on Aus­tralia Day and take the pub­lic hol­i­day lat­er, impor­tant legal ques­tions…

In the News

More than harm­less fun: How Valentine’s Day can blur the line between cel­e­bra­tion and harassment

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“More than harm­less fun: How Valentine’s Day can blur the line between cel­e­bra­tion…

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, The legal impli­ca­tions of the Dig­i­tal Work Sys­tems Bill”, pub­lished in HR Leader

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“The legal impli­ca­tions of the Dig­i­tal Work Sys­tems Bill”, pub­lished in HR LeaderTo read…

Hap­py Lunar New Year 2026 – Wel­com­ing the Year of the Fire Horse

The Fire Horse (Bing Wu) is known for its bold ener­gy, charis­ma, speed, and trans­for­ma­tive spir­it, sym­bol­is­ing a peri­od of break­throughs…

Sign up for our Newsletter

*Mandatory information