State Central Authority; Department Of Human Services and Jaheer

[2014] FamCA 256

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

STATE CENTRAL AUTHORITY; DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES & JAHEER [2014] FamCA 256

FAMILY LAW – proceed ex parte with orders – injunction

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: State Central Authority; Department OF Human Services

RESPONDENT: Mr Jaheer

FILE NUMBER: MLC 6384 of 2013

DATE DELIVERED: 25 March 2014

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 25 March 2014

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms Accornero

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Department of Human Services

Orders

1. THAT leave is granted to the applicant to proceed ex parte with orders in terms of paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of the application filed on 21 March 2014.

2. THAT the application be adjourned for further hearing on 3 April 2014 at 9:00am.

3. THAT the applicant effect service of the application and this Order on the respondent mother as soon as practicable.

4. THAT in the event that the respondent mother has been served with the application by the adjourned date:

   a)she file and serve an affidavit in response to the application indicating her defence to the application no later than 4 pm on 2 April 2014;

   (b)she file and serve a Notice for Address for Service; and

   (c)she attend Court personally on 3 April at 9:00am and remain at Court pending further order of the Court.

5. THAT until further order, the respondent mother, her servants or agents be restrained by injunction from causing or permitting or suffering the child B the (“child”):

   a)to be removed from the Commonwealth of Australia, and in this regard all officers of the Australian Federal Police be directed to enforce, if required, the provisions of such order;

   b)to be removed from the State of Victoria; or

   c)to reside at any address other than their present residential address or any other residence at which the applicant has agreed that the child reside. 

6. THAT the Australian Federal Police place the name of the child on the Airport Watch List in force at all points of arrival and departure in the Commonwealth of Australia and maintain the child’s name on the Airport Watch List until further order of the Court.

7. THAT the respondent mother, her servants or agents forthwith deliver up to the Registrar of the Family Court of Australia at Melbourne for safe custody any and all passports held in the name of the child or upon which the child appears and be restrained from applying for any further or other passports for the child pending further orders of this Court.

8. THAT a sealed copy of these Orders be provided forthwith to the Marshal of the Family Court of Australia, the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police and the Secretary of the Commonwealth Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym <State Central Authority & Jaheer> has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 2389 of 2014

STATE CENTRAL AUTHORITY; DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

Applicant

And

Mr Jaheer

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application brought by the State Central Authority under the Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations 1986 concerning a child B born in 2007.  It is asserted by the applicant that the parties who are the parents of the child separated in around 2008 but subsequent to that period of time the father had at least weekly contact with him.  In April 2013 the mother took B and moved to Melbourne, and although the explanations are somewhat vague as to why it has taken this long for the application to be brought what the father does assert is that the mother has family in Country C who have considerable resources and have spoken of travelling to Country C to stay with them. 

2. He fears that she may move from Australia back to Country C and that would thwart his rights of custody in respect of the laws of Country D.  I am satisfied that having regard to the somewhat vague nature of what the father says about what he has endeavoured to do in the last 12 months it is appropriate to proceed in the absence of the mother and the matter can come back in just over a week’s time: 

   A.I will adjourn the matter to Thursday, 3 April 2014 at 9 am;

   B.The mother is to file and serve a response and affidavit material by 4 o’clock on 2 April 2014; 

   C.I will have these reasons transcribed; and

   D.I will otherwise make orders in terms of paragraphs (b), (c) and (d). 

I certify that the preceding two (2) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin delivered on 25 March 2014.

Associate: 

Date:  16 April 2014