SANDFORD & COBB

In *Sandford & Cobb* [2016] FamCA 11, Forrest J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications by the mother concerning the children's travel and the transfer of proceedings, and applications by the father concerning the children's time with him and the inclusion of the children's names on the Federal Police Watch List. The mother sought permission to remove the children from Australia for a holiday to Laos and to transfer the proceedings to the Townsville Registry. The father sought orders for the children to spend time with him and for protective measures regarding international travel.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the mother's application for international travel for the children, considering her history of unilaterally removing them overseas and the impact on their schooling. It also had to consider the father's application for the children's names to be placed on the Federal Police Watch List as a protective measure. Furthermore, the court needed to assess the best interests of the children in relation to their contact with the father, including the allegations of violence against the mother by the father and the children's current lack of contact with him. Finally, the court was asked to decide on the mother's application to transfer the proceedings to Townsville, given the parties' legal representation was located in Northern New South Wales.

Forrest J dismissed the mother's application to remove the children from Australia and to transfer the proceedings to Townsville. The court reasoned that the mother's history of unilaterally taking the children overseas, coupled with the disruption to their schooling, weighed against granting permission for international travel. The court also found that the children's best interests were not served by transferring the proceedings to Townsville, given the existing legal representation in New South Wales. However, the court granted the father's application to place the children's names on the Federal Police Watch List as a protective measure, acknowledging the mother's past conduct. The court also made detailed orders for the children to spend time with the father, commencing with supervised contact facilitated by Centacare X, with a view to increasing the duration and independence of this time over subsequent school holidays and calendar months. These orders included provisions for therapeutic counselling for the mother and children, and for the father's involvement in such therapy, with the ultimate determination of costs reserved. The court also made orders regarding communication between the children and the father, and directed the mother to update school records and refer to the father appropriately when speaking to the children.