B v B (Re Jurisdiction)

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia heard an appeal concerning jurisdiction in a matter between B (the applicant) and B (the respondent). The dispute involved an application for final parenting orders.

The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether the Family Court of Australia had jurisdiction to make final parenting orders in circumstances where the child concerned was habitually resident in New Zealand, and the respondent parent was also habitually resident in New Zealand.

The Full Court considered the operation of section 69ZK of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), which deals with the jurisdiction of the Family Court in relation to children. The Court affirmed the principle that the Family Court does not have jurisdiction to make final parenting orders concerning a child who is habitually resident in a contracting state to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, unless specific exceptions apply. In this instance, New Zealand is a contracting state, and the child was found to be habitually resident there. The Court reasoned that the legislative intent behind section 69ZK was to prevent Australian courts from exercising jurisdiction over children habitually resident in other contracting states, thereby respecting the jurisdiction of those states. The Court found that no exceptions to this general rule were applicable on the facts before it.

The appeal was dismissed, and the orders of the primary judge were affirmed.