Re JRL; Ex parte CJL

The High Court of Australia considered an application for a writ of prohibition by JRL against CJL. The dispute concerned the jurisdiction of the Family Court of Australia to make orders regarding the custody of a child, where the parents were not married and the child had not been born at the time of the application.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Family Court had the power to make orders concerning the custody of a child who had not yet been born. This question involved an interpretation of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), specifically provisions relating to the definition of "child" and the court's jurisdiction in matters of custody.

The Court held that the Family Court did not have jurisdiction to make custody orders in relation to a child who had not yet been born. The majority reasoned that the term "child" as used in the relevant sections of the *Family Law Act* referred to a person who had already been born. They emphasized that the Act conferred powers upon the court to deal with existing rights and obligations concerning children, not potential future rights or obligations concerning a child yet to come into existence. The Court distinguished between the court's power to make orders concerning the welfare of a child before birth in certain limited circumstances (such as protection from harm) and its power to make definitive custody orders.

The High Court made absolute the order nisi for prohibition, preventing the Family Court from proceeding with the custody application.