In the case Gujic & Arterbury [2024], the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Division 1, was tasked with deciding on an appeal concerning the summary return of children to Malaysia, a country not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The appellant father sought to challenge the primary judge’s decision that had allowed the respondent mother to take their children to Malaysia, fearing they would not return. His appeal, which included a request to submit new evidence based on translations obtained through Google Translate, argued that the primary judge erred in her factual findings, including the assertion that the mother would not take the children to Iran and the children's ties to Malaysia. However, the court dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial evidence to overturn the primary judge's decision. It ruled the translations inadmissible and the appellant's evidence insufficient to demonstrate a significant risk of the children not being returned from Malaysia. Consequently, the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent’s appeal costs, totalling $19,231.17.
From the TLDR Caselaw Archive