Family Court: 9 month baby allowed to travel to China

Family Court: 9 month baby allowed to travel to China

A mother was allowed to take her 9 month old baby to China by the Family Court recently, despite opposition by the father, who feared that the baby would not be returned.

The mother told the court that the baby was travelling to China to be with the maternal grandparents during Chinese New Year.

The Family Court in Gin and Hing followed earlier principles in  Line and Line (1997) about whether to allow children to travel overseas:

(a) The existence or otherwise of continuing ties between the departing parent and Australia (such as the ownership of real estate, the existence of business interests, or the residence of close family or friends here);

The court found that the mother was an Australian citizen,  her travel papers did not recognise her as a citizen of China, that she had lived in Australia for the last 7 years,  that there was yet to be a property settlement and the mother had offered to put up her share of a $800,000 and $1 million as a bond to ensure her and the baby’s return. This was the key factor for the child to be returned.

(b) The existence and strength of possible motives not to return (including the level of conflict between the parents, particularly over child related issues);

The father said that the mother’s parents had come to Australia as business migrants, but had sold their home here and moved back to China, that they were very wealthy and intended for the child not to return. There was no evidence that they would try and prevent the child from returning. 

(c) The existence and strength of possible motives to remain in the other nominated country (such as the ownership of real estate, the existence of business interests, or the residence of close family and/or personal friends there);

Justice Cronin found that the risk of non-return was low.

(d) Whether the country of travel is a signatory to the Hague convention.

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is the prime means to retrieve children from overseas. It is usually a lot easier to get a child back from a country that has signed up to the Hague convention than one that has not. China has not signed the Hague convention.

Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Surrogacy and Medicare: Why the Outdated Exclusion Needs to Go

In this episode of the Australian Family and Fertility Law Podcast, Stephen Page dives into a long-overdue issue: the exclusion of surrogacy from Medicare funding in Australia.

Importing Sperm into Australia. Where Does it Come From?

In this eye-opening video, Stephen Page breaks down the surprising reality behind sperm donation in Australia — and why we rely so heavily on imports.

Importing Eggs into Australia. Where Do They Come From?

In this video, Page Provan Director, Stephen Page, dives into the egg-sport reality of Australia’s fertility landscape. With a shortage of local egg donors, many Aussie hopefuls are turning overseas to make their dreams of parenthood a reality.

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board