Rowe & Anor and Van Huesen

In the Family Court of Australia, Ms Rowe, the first applicant, sought leave to commence adoption proceedings for two children, E and F, with whom she was in a de facto relationship with their father, Mr Evans. The respondent, Ms Van Huesen, the biological mother of the children, objected to the application. The court was required to determine whether granting leave for the adoption proceedings would be in the best interests of the children, E and F.

The court's reasoning centred on the best interests of the children, as mandated by section 60G of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). This involved considering the factors outlined in section 60CC of the Act. The court placed significant weight on the family report prepared by Ms G, an expert, which recommended that leave not be granted. Ms G's report highlighted that both the mother and, initially, the father did not support the application, citing the potential detriment to family relationships and the hurt it would cause. Although the father later changed his position to support the application, Ms G maintained her recommendation, noting the potential emotional cost to the children's relationships with their siblings and their capacity to reconnect with their mother. The court found Ms G's report to be persuasive and acknowledged the applicant's submissions regarding custody, but distinguished these from the specific requirements for granting leave to commence adoption proceedings.

Ultimately, the court dismissed the application for leave to commence adoption proceedings. The court ordered that each party bear their own costs, noting that the proceedings were governed by the Family Law Act.