ADEL & BANES

The parties, the mother and the father, were before the court concerning parenting orders for their child. The mother sought sole parental responsibility and for the child to live with her, with the father to spend time with the child. The father sought a recovery order to enforce a United States court order, registered in Australia, which stipulated the child live with him and be returned to the United States.

The court was required to determine the father's application for a recovery order and the mother's application for interim parenting orders. Central to these applications was the question of the court's jurisdiction to make parenting orders while a registered overseas child order persisted, and the circumstances under which such jurisdiction could be exercised. The court also considered the role of an Independent Children's Lawyer and the process for preliminary mediation.

The court reasoned that it could only vary a registered overseas child order with the consent of the parties or if satisfied that there were substantial grounds to believe the child's welfare required the court to exercise jurisdiction. This necessitated demonstrating that the child's welfare was likely to be adversely affected if a subsequent parenting order was not made, or that there had been a significant change in circumstances since the overseas order was made. The court ordered that the matter be fixed for a determination of interim issues, requiring the mother to file and serve evidence in response to the father's evidence. Parties were directed to be in a position to make submissions on jurisdiction, and interim electronic communication between the father and child was ordered. An Independent Children's Lawyer was appointed to represent the child's interests, investigate mediation, and oversee the implementation of communication orders. A family report was also ordered to address specific matters concerning the child's welfare and the potential for orders at variance with the overseas order.