Bahar and Sohrab (No 7)

In *Bahar and Sohrab (No 7)*, Gill J of the Family Court of Australia considered proceedings for contempt against Mr Sohrab and an application for those proceedings to be conducted in a manner analogous to fitness to plead proceedings. The central dispute revolved around Mr Sohrab's capacity to participate in the contempt proceedings.

The court was required to determine whether the contempt proceedings against Mr Sohrab should be stayed and, if so, on what basis. Furthermore, the court needed to address the application concerning the conduct of the proceedings in light of Mr Sohrab's potential disability, and whether a case guardian should be appointed.

His Honour ordered that the contempt proceedings against Mr Sohrab and the application for them to be conducted analogously to fitness to plead proceedings be stayed. This stay is to remain in effect until a case guardian is appointed for Mr Sohrab or until he is no longer considered a person under a disability. The court noted that, pursuant to Rule 6.11 of the *Family Law Rules 2004*, no suitable person was available for appointment as a case guardian. Consequently, the court requested that the Attorney-General for the Commonwealth of Australia nominate a person in writing to serve as Mr Sohrab's case guardian and directed the Registrar to bring these orders to the Attorney-General's attention.