Director-General, Department of Communities (Child Safety Services) & Rolfston

The case involved an appeal by the Director-General, Department of Communities (Child Safety Services) against the decision of a trial judge who dismissed an application to return a child to the United States under the Hague Convention. The child had travelled to Australia with her mother, with the consent of the father. After the mother informed the father she did not intend to return, the parties reached a parenting agreement. The Central Authority argued that the child was habitually resident in the United States at the relevant time, but the trial judge disagreed. The court was required to determine if the trial judge had erred in his findings regarding habitual residence and acquiescence, and whether he had appropriately considered the father's intentions.

The court examined the concepts of acquiescence and habitual residence, noting that the Central Authority contended that the only way the child could have lost her place of habitual residence was through a finding of acquiescence, which had not been satisfied. The court also assessed whether the trial judge had erred in applying the factual nexus and reasoning of the High Court in LK v Director-General, Department of Community Services. After careful consideration, the court found no merit in any ground of appeal, affirming the trial judge's decision.

The appeal was dismissed, and the court outlined a schedule for the parties to file written submissions regarding the costs of the appeal. The respondent had twenty-one days to file submissions, followed by fourteen days for the appellant to respond, and seven days for the respondent to reply. Each submission was to be endorsed with the date a copy was served on the other party.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed and that the parties proceed with filing written submissions regarding the costs of the appeal according to the specified timetable.