Mohsein and Mohsein (No 2)

In *Mohsein & Mohsein (No 2)*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by Ms Mohsein (the applicant) against Mr Mohsein (the respondent) concerning their child, B. The dispute centred on obtaining information about the child's whereabouts and potentially making a recovery order for the child, given serious allegations of abuse made by the applicant against the respondent.

The court was required to determine whether to issue an order compelling Centrelink (the Department of Human Services) to provide information regarding the address of the child and/or the respondent, and whether to make a recovery order for the child. Additionally, the court considered the application of section 121 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) regarding the publication of information about the proceedings, particularly in light of potential criminal proceedings.

Justice Cronin was satisfied that Centrelink was likely to possess information about the respondent, as he was a beneficiary of Centrelink payments. Pursuant to sections 67M(2) and 67N(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975*, the court ordered the Chief Executive Officer of Centrelink/Secretary of the Department of Human Services to furnish forthwith to the Registrar such information as was contained in their records regarding the address of the child and/or the respondent. The court also ordered that any information received not be released without a further order. Regarding the recovery order, the court applied section 60CC of the Act, balancing the primary considerations of the child having a meaningful relationship with both parents against the need to protect the child from physical and psychological harm, abuse, neglect, and family violence. Given the serious, albeit untested, allegations of abuse by the respondent against the applicant when she was a child of the same age as B, and the applicant's assertion that B is at risk, the court concluded that the protection of the child from harm outweighed the benefit of a meaningful relationship on an interim basis, and therefore made a recovery order. The court also permitted the applicant's solicitor to provide material about the proceedings to relevant police and departmental officers, exercising its power under section 121 of the Act due to the serious nature of the allegations. The respondent was to be given an opportunity to be heard via video link.