Zao and Zao

[2017] FamCA 515

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ZAO & ZAO [2017] FamCA 515

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN - Recovery order

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Zao

RESPONDENT: Mr Zao

FILE NUMBER: MLC 6341 of 2017

DATE DELIVERED: 28 June 2017

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 28 June 2017

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Lim

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Francis Lim Barristers & Solicitors

Orders

1. I make a recovery order in the usual terms that all officers of the Commonwealth and all police forces of the states are, if necessary, by virtue of this order entitled to take such action, including force, to remove the child from the father and return her to the mother.  I will have the order expedited.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER:  MLC 6341 of 2017

Ms Zao

Applicant

And

Mr Zao

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an ex parte application for parenting orders including a recovery order.  My concern, as expressed last night, was that there was no information that would enable me to make an order, let alone make an order on an ex parte basis.  Last night I granted an injunction preventing the child who is not quite three from leaving Australia.  Today, with some oral evidence, I am satisfied that the child, B, was taken inappropriately from her primary carer and, on any view of the untested evidence, B should currently be with her mother at the moment.  All of the evidence points to the fact that the applicant has been the primary carer. 

2. Under those circumstances, an order should be made that till further order the applicant wife have the daily care and control of the child, B.  There being no evidence as to where this child is, all of the necessary resources of the Commonwealth and the states are going to be have to be used to ascertain her whereabouts and to implement whatever is necessary to return the child. 

   RECORDED   :   NOT TRANSCRIBED

3. I will adjourn the matter to 7 July 2017 at 9 am.

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin delivered on 28 June 2017.

Associate:

Date: 18 July 2017