Event and Time
Event Description
The case involves a family law matter concerning the mother (MS EKWUEME) seeking permission to travel internationally with her child (X), opposed by the father (MR CHINASA) who fears for the child's safety and potential non-return from countries that are not parties to the Hague Convention.
Application and Claims
- The mother is on a bridging visa in Australia and wishes to travel with her child to Country C and Country B.
- The father, who is an Australian citizen, contends that traveling to non-Hague Convention countries poses risks of harm to the child and non-return.
- The Court must determine the conditions, if any, under which the mother may travel overseas with the child.
Judicial Decisions
- The Court reinstated an earlier order from 25 January 2017 that prohibits the removal of the child from Australia and maintains the child's name on the Family Law Watchlist.
- All other outstanding applications were dismissed, and the case was removed from the list of pending matters.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
Mother's Claims:
- Claims that obtaining a spousal visa for permanent residency will alleviate concerns about potential travel.
- Proposes to deposit a security bond of $10,000 and provide detailed travel plans if she is permitted to travel.
- Argues that her family resides in both Country C and Country B, and that visiting them is important for X’s upbringing.
Father's Claims:
- Contends that traveling to Country C, which is not a Hague signatory, poses significant risks of non-return, as well as potential harm to the child.
- Requests reinstatement of the order to keep X on the Family Law Watchlist due to concerns about the mother’s previous actions and current attitudes toward risks.