State Central Authority and Melnow

[2009] FamCA 41

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

STATE CENTRAL AUTHORITY & MELNOW [2009] FamCA 41

FAMILY LAW – HAGUE CONVENTION – Application for further location orders struck out

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: State Central Authority

RESPONDENT: Ms Melnow

FILE NUMBER: MLC 10556 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 7 January 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 7 January 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: No appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Department of Human Services

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance

Orders

1. That the application filed seeking further location orders is struck out.

2. That all outstanding proceedings be otherwise adjourned to a date to be fixed before the Honourable Justice Bennett.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym State Central Authority & Melnow is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER:  MLC 10556 of 2008

STATE CENTRAL AUTHORITY

Applicant

And

MS MELNOW

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is the matter of State Central Authority and Ms Melnow.  The matter came on before Bennett J on 3 December 2008 on an ex parte basis, that application brought effectively under the auspices of the Hague Convention. 

2. Her Honour made a variety of procedural orders, the import of which was to enable the State Central Authority to pursue the whereabouts of the mother.  One of those orders was a Commonwealth information order.  It transpires that the information provided by the department has not solved the problem, as a result of which on the same day those orders were made a further application appears to have been made. 

3. The application was returnable before the court today and there has been no appearance.  I presume from that that the information sought is not assisting the State Central Authority.  

4. Paragraph 6 of her Honour's orders provided that all extant applications be adjourned before her Honour on a date to be fixed.  It seems to me that is the appropriate place for the matter to continue. 

5. In the matter of State Central Authority and Melnow, I make no order in relation to the application before me today, other than to strike out the application in the case filed on 3 December 2008.  Secondly, that the matter otherwise remain adjourned before Bennett J on a date to be fixed.

I certify that the preceding Five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin 

Associate: 

Date:  15 January 2009