Skip to main content

Documentation Index

Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://help.rytz.com.au/llms.txt

Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

Inside the Parenting Planner is a best-interests analysis surface that maps every clause of your plan against the considerations the court must apply under section 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). It is one of the most-distinctive features of the platform and the one that connects your drafted plan to the legal test the court actually applies.

The s60CC framework (post-2024)

Section 60CC sets out how the court determines what is in a child’s best interests. The framework was substantially restructured by the Family Law Amendment Act 2023 (Cth), in force from 6 May 2024. The framework has three layers:

Six general considerations (s60CC(2))

The court must consider:
s60CC(2)Consideration
(a)What arrangements would promote the safety (including from family violence, abuse, neglect or other harm) of the child and each person who has care of the child
(b)Any views expressed by the child
(c)The developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs of the child
(d)The capacity of each person who has, or is proposed to have, parental responsibility for the child to provide for those needs
(e)The benefit to the child of being able to have a relationship with the child’s parents, and other people significant to the child, where it is safe to do so
(f)Anything else relevant to the particular circumstances of the child

Mandatory family-violence-history consideration (s60CC(2A))

The court must also consider any history of family violence, abuse or neglect involving the child or a person caring for the child, and any family-violence order that applies or has applied to the child or a member of the child’s family.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural connection

A standalone best-interests consideration of an ATSI child’s right to enjoy their culture, and the support each parent gives to that connection. See Key statutes — s60CC for precise statutory wording.

What the analysis does

The platform reads each of your plan’s clauses and maps it to the s60CC considerations it most addresses. The output is a structured matrix:
Clauses60CC(2)(a) safety(b) views(c) needs(d) capacity(e) relationships(f) others60CC(2A) FVATSI
1. Parental responsibilityweakstrongstrongmedium
2. Live with / spend timestrongmediumstrongstrongstrongmedium
3. Communicationweakstrongmediumweakstrong
4. Changeoverstrongweakmediummediummediumstrong
Cells indicate the strength of the clause’s coverage of each consideration. Together, the matrix shows you whether your plan addresses each consideration somewhere, or leaves a consideration uncovered.

Common findings

A few patterns the analysis commonly surfaces:

Strong on relationships, weak on capacity

Many plans focus heavily on time arrangements (clauses 2, 3, 5) but say little about each parent’s capacity to meet the children’s needs (clause 1, clause 6 schooling, clause 7 medical). The analysis flags this and suggests strengthening the capacity-relevant clauses.

Strong on safety, weak on cultural needs

For matters with FV disclosure, the safety overlay is often well-handled but cultural-needs (s60CC(2)(c) cultural component, ATSI consideration if applicable) can be under-addressed. The analysis surfaces gaps.

No coverage of children's views (s60CC(2)(b))

Many plans don’t address how children’s views are taken into account — particularly important for older children. The analysis suggests adding a clause or sub-clause.

Capacity claims without supporting evidence

Plans that assert capacity (“the parties can both provide for the children’s needs”) without supporting evidence in the Portfolio. The analysis flags for the Strategic briefing to consider.

How to use the analysis

The analysis is a structured second look at your plan. Three patterns:
Read for gaps, not for confirmation. The matrix shows which considerations your plan addresses; the gaps are more actionable than the strengths.
Treat ‘weak’ as a prompt, not a judgment. A weak rating on a particular consideration in a particular clause is the platform asking “should this clause say more about X?”. Sometimes the answer is yes; sometimes it’s no, because the consideration is addressed in a different clause. The analysis is informational.
Cross-check with your evidence. A clause that maps strongly to (d) capacity should be supported by Portfolio evidence on capacity — schooling continuity, medical engagement, work pattern. The analysis flags claim-evidence gaps.

When the analysis is most useful

MomentValue
Before solicitor reviewSolicitor’s hour focuses on subtle issues, not basic mapping
Before filing as Consent OrdersLast quality gate — court applies s60CC, you’ve already mapped to it
Mid-FDRMediator-style framing — “here’s how this proposal lines up against what the court applies”
Before any future variationThe analysis re-runs against the same framework, showing whether the case for variation aligns with s60CC

What the analysis will not do

  • It will not predict outcomes. The court applies s60CC; the platform does not. Your plan can map well to s60CC and still fall down on factual contests.
  • It will not assess whether the considerations support the orders you want. The analysis maps your plan to the framework; it doesn’t tell you whether your plan is the right plan for your matter.
  • It will not replace lawyer review. A senior family-law solicitor reading the same plan will catch nuances the analysis doesn’t.

How the analysis updates

The analysis regenerates automatically when:
  • You edit any clause
  • You change FV disclosure or ATSI status in your Master Case File
  • The platform’s underlying s60CC reasoning is updated (rare; happens with material legislative or case-law shifts)

What’s next

Section 63C explained

The s63C framework + the May 2024 amendments + how parenting plans operate.

Key statutes — s60CC

The post-2024 six-considerations + s60CC(2A) FV-history + ATSI consideration.

Strategic briefing

Wider strategic synthesis that incorporates the best-interests analysis.

Plan readiness

Overall completeness scoring framework.