Moseley and Bonfield

In the matter of *Moseley and Bonfield*, heard by Judge Scarlett, the dispute concerned parenting orders for a child, X. The father sought no orders for the child to spend time with him, while the mother sought permission for the child to travel internationally and for the mother to have sole parental responsibility. The proceedings also involved an application for costs on an indemnity basis and the issue of an Australian passport for the child.

The court was required to determine several key issues. These included whether the child should live with the mother and whether the mother should have sole parental responsibility, considering the need to protect the child from harm and the risk of the child not being returned to Australia. The court also had to assess the mother's application to take the child overseas and for the child to be issued an Australian passport, as well as the father's application for costs on an indemnity basis.

Judge Scarlett reasoned that the best interests of the child, including protection from harm, were paramount. The court found that the father posed an unacceptable risk to the child and that the mother should have sole parental responsibility. Consequently, all previous parenting orders were discharged. The mother was permitted to take the child overseas and to apply for an Australian passport for the child, with the court assessing the risk of the child not being returned to Australia as low. The father was ordered to pay the respondent mother's costs fixed at $5,742.50, with six months to pay. The court declined to award costs on an indemnity basis, finding no unusual or exceptional circumstances to warrant such an order.