Harrow and Eton (No 2)

This matter concerned parenting orders for a child, Z, born in 2002, and involved the mother and the father. The dispute centred on the living arrangements for Z and the allocation of parental responsibility for long-term decisions. The orders were made by Hogan J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine the primary caregiver for the child, the extent of parental responsibility to be vested in that caregiver concerning major long-term issues, and whether the child should be permitted to obtain an Australian travel document. Additionally, the court needed to address the release of any existing passport held by the court for the child and the discharge of the Independent Children’s Lawyer. The court also considered the dismissal of outstanding parenting applications and the process for any applications concerning costs.

Hogan J ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The child, Z, was to live with the mother, who was granted sole parental responsibility for all major long-term issues concerning Z, as defined by the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Pursuant to the *Australian Passports Act 2005* (Cth), Z was permitted to have an Australian travel document, and the Registrar of the Federal Circuit Court was ordered to release any passport held by the Brisbane Registry relating to Z to the mother. The court also made provisions for a Registrar to execute documents on behalf of the father if necessary to give effect to the orders, pursuant to s 106A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The Independent Children’s Lawyer was discharged, and the particulars of the obligations and consequences of contravention were to be set out in an attached Fact Sheet. All outstanding parenting applications were dismissed. The court also outlined a detailed procedure for any party seeking costs, including the filing of affidavits and written submissions, with any such application to be considered in Chambers.