STATE CENTRAL AUTHORITY, SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES & NORMAN

The parties involved were the State Central Authority, the Secretary to the Department of Human Services, and Norman. The dispute concerned an application for an order for the recovery of a child, with the Secretary seeking to have the child returned to Victoria. The matter came before Cronin J in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the child, who had been taken to New South Wales by her mother, should be returned to Victoria pursuant to the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) or the *Child Protection (International Conventions) Act 2003* (Vic). Specifically, the court had to determine if the child’s habitual residence was in Victoria and if the mother’s removal of the child constituted wrongful removal under the relevant conventions.

Cronin J considered the evidence presented regarding the child's upbringing and the circumstances of her removal. The court applied the principles of habitual residence, which requires a degree of settled purpose and stability, and examined whether the mother's actions were in breach of the father's rights of custody. The court found that the child's habitual residence was indeed in Victoria and that the removal was wrongful.

Consequently, the court ordered the child's return to Victoria.