Re: Addison (No. 3)

In *Re: Addison (No. 3)*, heard by Howard J, the mother sought to proceed ex parte with an application for stage 2 treatment for gender dysphoria for a child, without joining the father as a respondent. The mother alleged family violence.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the mother should be permitted to proceed ex parte, thereby dispensing with the requirement to join the father as a party and serve him with the application. This involved considering the implications of the alleged family violence and the need to protect the child's identity.

Howard J dismissed the mother's application to proceed ex parte and to dispense with rule 4.08(2) of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth). The court reasoned that the father ought to be joined as a respondent to the proceedings. Consequently, the court ordered that the father be joined as the respondent and that he be served with the amended initiating application and the mother's affidavits, along with a notice from the mother's solicitors. The court also directed the parties to provide draft orders for further directions and for the protection of the identities of the child, mother, child's family, and the relevant state or territory.