Soula and Jantic

The case of *Soula and Jantic* concerned an application brought by the mother against the father regarding their two children, B and C. The dispute involved the father's alleged contravention of existing court orders and the urgent need for protective measures concerning the children. The matter was heard by Cronin J in the Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to abridge time for the proceedings, suspend previous orders concerning the children, and issue a recovery order for the children. The court was also required to determine whether to restrain the father from collecting the children from school or crèche, or otherwise contacting them, and from removing them from the mother's care.

Cronin J reasoned that the circumstances warranted immediate action to ensure the children's safety and welfare. The court applied principles relating to the paramountcy of the child's welfare and the court's power to make protective orders, including recovery orders, under the *Family Law Act 1975*. The court found that the father's actions necessitated the suspension of prior orders and the issuance of a recovery order to facilitate the children's return to the mother.

The court made several orders, including abridging time, suspending certain previous orders, and restraining the father from collecting or contacting the children. Crucially, a recovery order was issued under s 67U of the *Family Law Act 1975*, authorising law enforcement to find and recover the children and deliver them to the mother. The father was also restrained from removing the children from the mother, with provisions for his arrest if he attempted to retake possession of them after the recovery order was executed. The application was otherwise adjourned and consolidated with substantive proceedings before Justice Johns, with liberty to apply on short notice. The mother was directed to serve the orders on the father by email.