A violent man was granted sole custody of his son because he was deemed to be more capable than the boy's mother, who was rebuked for allegedly trying to turn the child against his father.

Among the reasons the Family Court gave for choosing the father to be sole carer is because he was unemployed and, therefore, could "devote all his time to the care of the child", compared with the mother, who worked part-time.

Victims of Crime Assistance League chief executive Robyn Cotterell-Jones says the Family Court is out of touch with the effects of domestic violence. Credit:Max Mason-Hubers

In an extremely unusual case, Judge Stewart Austin found the parents were so toxic towards each other that it was in the child's best interests to eliminate one from his life entirely.

Judge Austin chose in favour of the father, despite the man having numerous domestic violence convictions, and said the mother's relationship with the boy, who was 10 at the time of the judgment, could be "revived" later in life.