Commonwealth Central Authority and Sangster (No 2)

In the matter of *Commonwealth Central Authority and Sangster (No 2)*, Bennett J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application to discharge a child return order. The application was brought by the Commonwealth Central Authority on behalf of Mr Sangster, seeking to rely on exceptional circumstances within the meaning of regulation 19A(2)(c) of the *Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations 1986* (Cth).

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the circumstances presented were sufficiently exceptional to warrant the discharge of the existing return order. This required an assessment of the cumulative effect of various factors to determine if they met the threshold of "exceptional circumstances" as contemplated by the Regulations. The Court also considered the factors relevant to the exercise of its discretion in discharging such an order.

Bennett J reasoned that while individual circumstances might not be exceptional, their cumulative effect could be. The Court found that the totality of the circumstances presented did indeed constitute exceptional circumstances, justifying the discharge of the return order. The Court's decision involved a careful balancing of the principles of the Hague Convention and the specific factual matrix before it, ultimately exercising its discretion to discharge the order.

Consequently, the Court ordered that paragraphs 2 to 12 of the Order made on 19 July 2018, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the Order made on 21 December 2017, and the Order made on 22 December 2017 be discharged pursuant to regulation 19A(c). The application in a case filed by the Independent Children’s Lawyer was otherwise dismissed.