Cranage & Hernandez

The matter before the court in Cranage & Hernandez involved a dispute between the parents, Mr Cranage and Ms Hernandez, concerning the relocation of their child, X, to another country. Both parents agreed that it was in X's best interests to continue living in Australia and abide by the parenting arrangement agreed upon in early 2013. However, Ms Hernandez sought permission to relocate X to another country if she and X's sisters were removed from Australia by the Department of Home Affairs, a request opposed by Mr Cranage.

The court was tasked with determining whether it was in X's best interests to relocate with his mother if she and his sisters were removed from Australia and if it was possible for this to occur within Australia. The court considered the primary considerations outlined in section 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), such as the benefit to the child of having a meaningful relationship with both parents and the child's views, given their age and level of maturity.

After reviewing the evidence presented, the court found that it was in X's best interests to live with his mother, both in Australia and, if necessary, outside of Australia if she and his sisters were removed. The court also dismissed Ms Hernandez's application to restrain the Minister for Home Affairs from issuing a notice in relation to the visas by which she and the child's sisters continued to live in Australia.

The court's orders included the discharge of all existing parenting orders, with specific provisions for X to live with his mother. In the event that the mother is removed from Australia, the court granted permission for X to relocate with her and outlined the shared parental responsibilities and time-sharing arrangements between the parents. The court also included provisions for communication between X and both parents, as well as obligations for both parents to inform each other of any changes to their contact information, medical professionals treating X, and any school or educational facility attended by X. The court further outlined consequences for non-compliance with these orders and appointed a Registrar to sign documents on behalf of the non-compliant parent, if necessary. Finally, the court ordered that no party is permitted to use any documents provided to them in the course of this proceeding for any purpose other than any appeal in respect of these Orders or any future parenting proceedings or any future proceedings to enforce this Order.