Family violence allegations feature in a huge chunk of parenting litigation and the Court’s job is to tease out what’s coercive control (or another form of family violence) from what’s honest disagreement between parents.
In Pickford & Pickford, the Full Court of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia took a deep dive into this challenging question.
The Backstory
The parties in Pickford were a separated couple with two children (9 and 6 years old). After lengthy litigation, the trial judge made final parenting orders giving the mother sole parental responsibility and restricting the father’s time with the children.
The court further found that the father had engaged in coercive and controlling conduct amounting to family violence against the mother.
Unsurprisingly, the father appealed, arguing major legal and factual errors in the trial judge’s findings. One of which was that the evidence did not support a conclusion of family violence in the form of coercive control.
What the Full Court Said
The Full Court’s decision is a useful compass on how ‘family violence’ should be understood in this context.
Two key themes emerged:
1. Not All Conflict Is Family Violence
There was plenty of parental conflict but conflict alone doesn’t automatically equate to family violence. The justices agreed that merely refusing to consent to a particular parenting arrangement or vigorously asserting legal rights in litigation is not, by itself, coercive control. Put simply: legal disagreement is not in itself family violence.
As one judge observed, “one litigant does not commit family violence against another litigant just by refusing to consent or submit to orders for which the opponent applies.”
This distinction is crucial for family law practitioners and clients alike. Allegations of family violence need to be supported by evidence of conduct that genuinely coerces or controls in the statutory sense, not merely evidence of robust parental (or even litigious) disagreement.
2. How the Court Interprets ‘Family Violence’
Section 4AB of the Family Law Act 1975 defines family violence broadly. It reaches behaviour that coerces or controls a family member or causes them to be fearful.
In Pickford, different judicial perspectives emerged on how broad that definition should be:
The majority view of the justices determining the case, emphasised that “family violence” is necessarily broad and protective in nature.
Their focus was on the impact of behaviour, and they were cautious not to let overly narrow definitions tamp down protections for those at risk.
The dissenting view or narrower interpretation of the remaining judges was that conduct should be evaluated objectively. That is coercive control must be demonstrated through the nature of the behaviour itself, not solely based on one party’s subjective experience or isolated incidents of conflict.
Practical Takeaways for Families:
Pickford offers key compass points when dealing with coercive control in the legal sense. It highlights that
🔹 Parental conflict and family violence: Robust disagreements, even if emotionally charged, aren’t automatically coercive or controlling.
🔹 Objective analysis is essential: Court findings must be grounded in evidence showing actual coercive or controlling conduct, not just perceptions of it.
🔹 Context matters: Judges must look at behaviour in its full context and assess impact, not just isolated acts.
🔹 Allegations carry weight: Because family violence findings are relevant to best-interests assessments for children, framing and proof really matter.
Why Pickford Matters
Carefully prepared evidence and affidavit material is often crucial to proving coercive control under the Family Law Act, which is often described as a pattern of behaviour or a serious of acts viewed as a whole.
Get advice before you act.
Contact Coastal Lawyers for clear, practical family law advice tailored to Central Coast families.
As former prosecutors and police officers Coastal Lawyers have extensive experience is providing trauma informed legal advice and strategies to Central Coast residents where family violence and coercive control are a significant feature.
Reminder: The above is legal information only and is not a substitute for obtaining tailored legal advice addressed at your unique family and situation.