Oxbourne & Ewans

In this matter before Sexton J, the dispute concerned a declaration sought by the Mothers under section 60H(1)(d) of the *Family Law Act 1975* that X was not a child of the Applicant. The Mothers' solicitor acknowledged this was not a parenting order, but submitted it would be reassuring and potentially assist in repairing the relationship between the Mothers and the Applicant if the Court made clear findings regarding the Applicant's parental status. Both the Applicant and the Independent Children's Lawyer opposed the making of this declaration.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant the declaration sought by the Mothers, and in doing so, to make clear findings regarding the Applicant's legal status in relation to X. A secondary issue involved the determination of costs, including the Independent Children's Lawyer's fees and the division of the court expert's remuneration between the parties.

Sexton J reasoned that the declaration sought by the Mothers was not in X's best interests, as it had the potential to cause embarrassment. The Court accepted the submission of the Independent Children's Lawyer on this point, noting that it had already made findings clarifying the Applicant's legal status in relation to X. Consequently, the Court decided not to make the declaration sought. The Court also considered the provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975* regarding costs, including the discretion to order costs in favour of an Independent Children's Lawyer and the joint liability of parties for court expert fees.

The Court ordered that the orders set out at the beginning of its Reasons were in the best interests of X. The Court also addressed the costs sought by the Independent Children's Lawyer and the division of the court expert's fees, having regard to the relevant sections of the *Family Law Act 1975* and the Federal Circuit Court Rules.