Hillman & Hillman (No 3)

In *Hillman & Hillman (No 3)*, Forrest J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father alleging two contraventions by the mother of existing court orders concerning their children. The mother conceded that she had contravened the orders but asserted that she had a reasonable excuse for her actions.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the mother had established a reasonable excuse for her admitted contraventions of the court orders. This required the court to assess the evidence presented by the mother to determine if it met the threshold for a lawful excuse under the relevant provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

Forrest J found that the mother had indeed established a reasonable excuse for her contraventions. The court's reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, led to the conclusion that the circumstances surrounding the mother's actions justified her conduct, thereby negating the contraventions as alleged by the father.

Consequently, the father's application alleging contravention was dismissed. Additionally, the court varied the orders made on 7 March 2016 by Judge Cassidy of the Federal Circuit Court, specifically by discharging paragraph 13 of those orders.