Lambie and Guy

This matter concerned an application before Judge A Kelly in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, involving the Applicant father and the Respondent mother regarding their child, [X]. The dispute centred on the care and welfare of the child, including issues of the child's residence, time spent with each parent, and the potential for the child to be removed from the State of Victoria. The court was required to make orders addressing these concerns and to consider the interaction between its orders and a prior Intervention Order made by the Magistrates' Court.

The court was required to determine several legal issues, including whether to vacate certain previous orders, to make orders regarding the child's residence and time with each parent, and to issue a Recovery Order if the child was not returned to the Applicant father. Furthermore, the court needed to address the communication between the parties, their participation in parenting programs, and the conduct of a Child Inclusive Conference. A significant issue was the determination of the operative legal instrument where the court's orders might conflict with an Intervention Order previously made by the Magistrates' Court.

In its reasoning, the court made orders by consent in relation to the child's residence and time with the Respondent mother, subject to supervision. Crucially, the court issued a Recovery Order pursuant to s 67Q of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) authorising law enforcement to recover the child if the Respondent mother failed to return the child to the Applicant father by a specified time. The court also declared that its orders prevailed over any inconsistent Interim Intervention Order made by the Magistrates' Court, rendering such an Intervention Order invalid pursuant to s 68Q(1) of the Act. The court further directed the parties to attend a parenting program and a Child Inclusive Conference, and to communicate via a parenting application.