Family Court case: habitual place of residence under the Hague Convention

In the recent Full Court of the Family Court case of Ustinov v South Australian State Central Authority, the court had to consider in a Hague convention case the issue of “habitual residence”. To show that there had been wrong removal or wrongful retention, it is necessary to show that the removal or retention is… Read More »Custom Single Post Header

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

Family Court case: habitual place of residence under the Hague Convention

In the recent Full Court of the Family Court case of Ustinov v South Australian State Central Authority, the court had to consider in a Hague convention case the issue of “habitual residence”.

To show that there had been wrong removal or wrongful retention, it is necessary to show that the removal or retention is from a convention country that is the child’s “habitual residence”.

The father, who was appealing from a decision to return the children to Bulgaria, argued in the Full Court that the trial judge had got it wrong, because:

The father had deposed that the arrangement for living in Bulgaria was only for approximately two years;
That was only a temporary arrangement;
There having been no cross-examination of the father, the trial judge should not have found contrary to his evidence that the arrangement was temporary.

The Court held:

Firstly, temporariness is a qualitative concept. Even if that abstract notion was determinative of whether the children were, in mid-2007, habitually resident in Bulgaria, the decision of whether the residence was temporary or not would have been one for the Judge, not one determined by what a party swore about it.
Secondly, in our view, upon which we will shortly expand, [the trial judge] correctly identified the question she had to answer, which was not whether the parents and children were in Bulgaria temporarily, but whether the parties (and children) were living in Bulgaria “voluntarily and for settled purposes”. We think it at least arguable that in rejecting any claim that the family’s residence in Bulgaria was “merely temporary” her Honour was saying no more than that it was “settled”.

Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Forced Marriage

On November 1st 2023, Accredited Family Law Specialist and Page Provan Director Stephen Page presented a paper at the Brisbane Zonta Club about forced marriage. I acknowledge the Jagera and Turrbal peoples, on whose lands we meet today, their elders, past, present and emerging. Ruqia Hidari was aged 21 and living in Victoria, when, according to police,… Read More »Forced Marriage

ACT Government Surrogacy Bill

The ACT Government has today introduced a bill to amend the ACT’s surrogacy laws. The proposed changes are more incremental than fundamental. They include allowing a single person to undertake surrogacy, for the surrogate to be single if needed, a requirement for legal advice and counselling beforehand, a written agreement being required, that traditional surrogacy is… Read More »ACT Government Surrogacy Bill

Planning to resolve: ADR in ART

ADR can help resolve disputes in ART cases. ADR is not limited to mediation and arbitration. Other types of informal dispute resolution can resolve disputes. When assisted reproductive treatment cases go off the rails, they can have the next level of bitterness and volatility. There can be a keen sense of betrayal when things don’t… Read More »Planning to resolve: ADR in ART