FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| ALFARSI & ELHAGE | [2016] FamCA 428 |
| FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – Where both parents and children are Australian citizens – Where children were removed from Australia to Iraq by the father in September 2014 – Where agreed that children were habitually resident in Australia at the time of their removal – Where the father asserts that he does not know who is caring for the children in Iraq – 1996 Convention as implemented in the Family Law Act 1975 does not have application – Consideration of habitual residence of the children – Children have remained “habitually resident” in Australia – Satisfied the Court has jurisdiction. |
| Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 69E, 111CA, 111CC, 111CD |
| [Alfarsi] & [Elhage] No. 2 [2016] FCCA 200 (unreported) Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services & Padwa [2016] FamCAFC 57 State Central Authority & Spring-Ernest (No.2) [2013] FamCA 906 |
| APPLICANT: | Ms Alfarsi |
| RESPONDENT: | Mr Elhage |
| FILE NUMBER: | PAC | 6203 | of | 2014 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 2 June 2016 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Parramatta |
| PLACE HEARD: | Parramatta |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Foster J |
| HEARING DATE: | 18 May 2016 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: | Ms Snelling |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: | Thurlows Family Lawyers |
| COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Mr Mando |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Kings Law Group |
Orders
That the father’s application for dismissal for want of jurisdiction is dismissed.
That any application for costs be made within 14 days by way of written submissions with any response thereto to be by way of written submission within a further 14 days thereafter.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Alfarsi & Elhage has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA |
FILE NUMBER: PAC 6203 of 2014
| Ms Alfarsi |
Applicant
And
| Mr Elhage |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
These are parenting proceedings concerning the children A born in 2009 and Z born in 2011 who were taken to war-torn Iraq in September 2014 by their father and left there whilst he returned to Australia. The mother seeks the return of the children.
The father contests the jurisdiction of this Court to make orders in relation to the children as, he asserts, the children are now habitually resident in Iraq.
The father through his counsel conceded that there were no relevant proceedings in Iraq in relation to the children.
He seeks a dismissal of the proceedings and consequently the discharge of the injunction restraining him from leaving Australia.
A History: The Federal Circuit Court Proceedings
Proceedings concerning the children were commenced by the mother in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia by application filed on 23 December 2014. In that application the mother sought final orders in relation to the children that in summary provided:
a)That the mother…
Continue reading Alfarsi & Elhage
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Alfarsi & Elhage [2016] FamCA 428
- Case
- [2016] FamCA 428
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether it possessed the necessary jurisdiction to hear the matter, and consequently, whether the father's application for dismissal on jurisdictional grounds should be granted.
Foster J dismissed the father's application for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. The reasoning behind this decision is not elaborated upon in the provided text, but the outcome signifies that the court found it had jurisdiction to proceed with the case.
The court ordered that any application for costs must be made within 14 days through written submissions, with any response to be filed within a further 14 days thereafter.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
That the father’s application for dismissal for want of jurisdiction is dismissed.
2.
That any application for costs be made within 14 days by way of written submissions with any response thereto to be by way of written submission within a further 14 days thereafter.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.