State Central Authority and Lore

In the matter of *State Central Authority and Lore*, Bennett J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the State Central Authority for the return of a child, born in June 1998, to New Zealand. The application was made pursuant to Regulation 16(1) of the Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations 1986. The dispute concerned the child's habitual residence and the circumstances of their removal from New Zealand to Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the child should be returned to New Zealand under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. This required the Court to determine if the child had been wrongfully removed from their habitual residence in New Zealand and if the conditions for return under the Convention were met. The Court also had to consider the practical arrangements for the child's return and the allocation of associated costs.

Bennett J reasoned that the child's habitual residence was New Zealand and that the removal to Australia was wrongful. The Court applied the principles of the Hague Convention, focusing on the child's welfare and the need for prompt return to the jurisdiction of habitual residence. The Court ordered the child's return to New Zealand, specifying the flight details and the responsibility for the costs of transport. The Court also made orders regarding the discharge of previous orders, the facilitation of the child's departure by the respondent father, and the collection of the child's passport. The issue of indemnification for flight costs was reserved for the New Zealand courts.