HELMES & HELMES

The parties in this matter were the mother, who is from the Czech Republic, and the father, who is Australian. The dispute concerned parenting orders for their child, specifically the mother's application to relocate with the child to the Czech Republic, which the father opposed. The proceedings were heard in the Family Court of Australia before Ryan J.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the mother's application for international relocation of the child to the Czech Republic, or to make orders for the child to live with the mother and spend time with the father, as sought by the father. A significant issue also arose regarding the father's conduct in obtaining ex parte orders through the presentation of misleading evidence.

Ryan J noted that the mother had previously been unsuccessful in Hague Convention proceedings in the Czech Republic, where she was ordered to return the child to Australia. Despite this, the mother sought to return to the Czech Republic with the child. The court applied the principles from *Kennedy & Kennedy* (1993) FLC 92-409, emphasizing that ex parte applications must be approached with caution and that the father's misleading evidence meant an order of the type obtained would not have been made had the full truth been known. During the hearing, the parties entered into consent orders.

Although consent orders were made, it was necessary for the court to deliver reasons for judgment to record the nature of the evidence presented during the hearing, particularly concerning the father's conduct in relation to the ex parte application.