In Re F (Hague Convention: Child's Objections) (Application to re-open)

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father to re-open proceedings that had already been determined by the Court. The original proceedings involved an application by the mother to set aside orders requiring the return of a child, F, to the United States under the Hague Convention. The Full Court had previously allowed the mother's appeal, setting aside the return orders and dismissing the application for the child's return. The father subsequently sought to re-open the Full Court's decision.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether it possessed the power to re-open proceedings after its orders had been perfected. A related question concerned the authority of a Registrar to reject documents presented for filing in support of such an application.

The Court applied the principles established in *DJL v Central Authority* (2000) 201 CLR 226, which affirmed that the Full Court does not have inherent jurisdiction to re-open its own final orders once perfected. The Court found no basis in law to grant the father's application to re-open the proceedings.

Consequently, the father's application was dismissed.