The statement responds to media reporting published from 7–10 September 2026. It explains the Courts' current approach and continuing priorities; it is not a new law or practice direction.
Allegations must be taken seriously and tested fairly
The Courts say child abuse and family violence allegations are treated seriously, but are not automatically assumed to be true or false. Parenting decisions must be made on the available evidence, with children's safety and best interests as the paramount consideration.
The statement also points to risk screening, specialist case management, information sharing with police and child protection agencies, and protective orders that can include supervision or no time with a parent where required for safety.
Views are important, but not considered in isolation
The Courts say a child's views are considered where appropriate alongside the other evidence, with weight depending on age, maturity and individual circumstances. Court Child Experts and Independent Children's Lawyers can help place children's views and best interests before the Court.
Fair safeguards must work in both directions
The statement recognises that legal proceedings can be misused to cause financial or psychological harm. It says courts can manage harmful, vexatious or unmeritorious proceedings while preserving procedural fairness and legitimate access to justice.
It also states that family reports are expert evidence rather than binding decisions, supports strong standards and accountability for experts, and says the Courts do not mandate a particular commercial laboratory or toxicology method. Who pays for court-related testing depends on the circumstances of each case.
Protect
Genuine victims and children must receive effective safety measures and accessible support.
Examine
Serious allegations, expert opinions and testing results should be assessed independently against all relevant evidence.
Hear fairly
Procedural fairness, lawful review and meaningful participation strengthen confidence in outcomes.
Protection and procedural fairness are complementary
The Court's stated principles closely reflect Justice Before Judgment's balanced position: protect genuine victims and children, examine evidence independently, and do not treat an allegation itself as a final finding.
Public confidence also requires accessible reasons, reliable data, accountable expert practice and room for independent scrutiny. This official statement explains the Courts' position; it does not independently evaluate every outcome and does not endorse this campaign.
Fairness needs a public voice.
Read the campaign explainer, then add your support if you agree that safety, evidence and fair process must operate together.
Source note: This update summarises an official court statement and adds clearly labelled campaign commentary. It is general public information, not legal advice.