GEEVES & GEEVES

This case concerned parenting arrangements for a child, J, born in April 2004. The applicant father, Mr Geeves, sought orders for the child to live with him and for him to have sole parental responsibility. The respondent mother, Ms Geeves, had moved to Japan after the parties' separation and had made no attempt to communicate with the child. The father had made numerous attempts to serve court documents on the mother in Japan, which had been unsuccessful. The proceedings were heard in the Family Court of Australia by Benjamin J.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. Firstly, whether to dispense with the requirement of service of court documents on the mother, given the father's extensive efforts to serve her. Secondly, whether to grant the father sole parental responsibility for the child, considering untested allegations of violence by the mother towards the child. Thirdly, the court needed to consider the child's living arrangements and the mother's communication with the child. Finally, the court had to address the matter of overseas travel for the child and whether the child's name should remain on the Airport Watch List.

In reaching its decision, the court applied the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly those relating to the paramount consideration of the child's best interests under section 60CA. The court noted that much of the evidence before it was untested, primarily consisting of affidavits from the father and his solicitor. The court granted the father's application to dispense with service on the mother, subject to specific conditions requiring the father to forward copies of the orders, reasons, and relevant affidavits to the mother in Japan. The court also made final parenting orders, granting the father parental responsibility for long-term issues such as education, religious and cultural upbringing, and health, with a process for consultation with the mother. However, this sole parental responsibility was limited and did not extend to changing the child's name or relocating the child overseas without the mother's consent or a court order. The child was ordered to live with the father, and specific arrangements were made for telephone communication between the child and the mother. The child's name was to remain on the Airport Watch List until she attained the age of fourteen years, unless otherwise ordered.