FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KAmara & ricardo	[2014] FamCA 64	

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the Father sought parenting orders – Where the Director-General, Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services made an application in separate proceedings under the Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations 1986 (Cth) for the return of the children to Canada – Where the Father consented in those proceedings to the children being returned to Canada – Application for parenting orders dismissed	

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) 
Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations 1986 (Cth)	

APPLICANT:	Mr Kamara	

RESPONDENT:	Ms Ricardo	

FILE NUMBER:	BRC 	8330	of	2013	

DATE DELIVERED:	7 February 2014	

PLACE DELIVERED:	Brisbane	

PLACE HEARD:	Brisbane	

JUDGMENT OF:	Kent J	

HEARING DATE:	7 February 2014	

REPRESENTATION

FOR THE APPLICANT:	In Person	

SOLICiTOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:	Salvos Legal Humanitarian 	

		

Orders
IT IS ORDERED BY CONSENT THAT

(1)	The Application for parenting orders filed by the Applicant Father be dismissed. 
(2)	The matter be removed from the pending cases list. 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT
(3)	The Orders made on 4 November 2013 by Judge Coates in the Federal Circuit Court be discharged.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym  Kamara & Ricardo 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 brisbane	

FILE NUMBER: BRC 8330 of 2013

Mr Kamara	
Applicant

And

Ms Ricardo	
Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1.	These parenting proceedings concern the children N, born in September 2010, and F, born in June 2012.  The Father is the Applicant in the proceedings, and he represents himself this morning on the hearing before me.  The Mother appears by her solicitor.  
2.	These parenting proceedings were brought by the Father, albeit that there were proceedings instituted under the Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations 1986 (Cth), which may conveniently be described as the Hague proceedings.
3.	Today was the return date of the Hague proceedings in terms of any final trial of those proceedings if a trial was necessary.  
4.	In the event, the applicant in the Hague proceedings, the Director-General, Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services and the Father, who is the respondent in those proceedings, were able to reach final agreement, so far as the Hague proceedings concerned, involving the making of consent orders seeing the return of the subject children to Canada on or before 16 February 2014.  
5.	As the children will be returned to the Canadian jurisdiction, it obviously follows that any parenting proceedings concerning any parenting orders to be made in respect of the children will be heard and determined in Canada.  
6.	There is thus no longer any utility in parenting proceedings remaining on foot in Australia.  The Father confirms to me this morning that he understands the parenting proceedings ought be dismissed and consents to their dismissal, and that is the order which the Mother seeks.
7.	I therefore make the orders set out at the commencement of these reasons. 
I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Kent delivered on 7 February 2014.

Associate:  

Date:  10 February 2014