Bernati & Anor and Vaulks & Anor

In the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Gill J considered applications by Mr and Mrs Bernati seeking to dispense with the consent of Mr Vaulks to the adoption of two children, Y and X. The dispute centred on whether Mr Vaulks' consent, ordinarily required for adoption, should be dispensed with by the court.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the circumstances warranted dispensing with Mr Vaulks' consent to the adoption of Y and X by Mr Bernati, pursuant to section 35 of the *Adoption Act 1993* (ACT). This required the court to determine if there were sufficient grounds to proceed with the adoption applications despite the absence of the father's consent.

Gill J reasoned that the matters before the court strongly indicated that the adoption applications should be considered on their merits, and that dispensing with Mr Vaulks' consent was in the children's best interests. The judge concluded that circumstances justified dispensing with the consent requirement. However, the court emphasised that this did not predetermine the outcome of the substantive adoption applications, which would still require consideration of section 39F of the Act, including whether to terminate the parental relationship with Mr Vaulks and establish one with Mr Bernati. The court adjourned the adoption applications for further directions and ordered that Mr Vaulks be provided with a copy of the orders and reasons for judgment.