KEIRN & MOXEY

In the matter of *Keirn & Moxey*, the wife sought orders permitting her to relocate to the United Kingdom with the parties' children and to institute proceedings there concerning their future. The husband contested this, arguing that Australia was the appropriate forum.

The primary legal issue before the court was to determine the appropriate forum for the proceedings concerning the children. Additionally, the court was required to consider interim property settlement orders, particularly in light of the wife's removal of funds from a joint account.

Rees J found that the wife was not estopped from arguing for the United Kingdom as the appropriate forum, despite having sought orders in the Australian proceedings. However, the court determined that Australia was the appropriate forum, noting that both parents and the children were settled in Australia. The single expert's opinion that the wife could remain in Australia for the foreseeable future and that a return to the United Kingdom would disrupt the children's living arrangements were significant factors in this determination.

Consequently, the court made interim orders for the children to spend time with the husband. In relation to property, the wife was ordered to pay $200,000 to the husband from the $623,000 she had removed from their joint account, by way of partial property settlement. A further $223,000 was to be deposited into a jointly controlled interest-bearing account pending further order, with the remaining balance retained by the wife as a partial property settlement. The wife's application for interim orders contained in her Response filed on 17 March 2015 was dismissed.