Kiwi sportsman tells of ‘heartbreak’ in transtasman custody battle

A Kiwi international sportsman is mired in a transtasman custody battle after his ex-partner allegedly went on holiday with their daughter and never returned.

The father, a professional sporting star, who with the others involved in the case cannot be named because of Family Court laws, has invoked the international child abduction agreement, the Hague Convention, to be reunited with his daughter.

A Family Court judge in New Zealand has ruled that the child was wrongfully removed from Australia.

Judge Catriona Doyle last month ordered that the young child return to Australia within 21 days.

But the mother has appealed the decision to the High Court.

The parents, New Zealand citizens, moved to Australia about two years into their relationship and took children from previous relationships with them, according to Judge Doyle’s written decision seen by the Herald.

They separated about two years after moving to Australia and the father was not aware she was pregnant, Judge Doyle was told. The child was born prematurely that year. The mother says she hadn’t planned for the child to be born, or remain, in Australia.

The father found out about the birth through a friend, the court heard. After the birth, the baby and mother lived with the father, who was in a new relationship.

Early last year, the mother wanted to return to New Zealand with the child. The father agreed, as long as it was only for a holiday.

“The text messages from the mother to the father . . . show, at times, the mother’s clear intention was to return permanently to New Zealand, but also appear to indicate she remained committed to living in Australia to see out her dreams of having a small business and because of the greater opportunities for the child in Australia,” the Family Court decision says.

The court heard that the mother got travel documentation without the father knowing and left the country. He found they were in New Zealand after recognising a park in a photo.

The father later lodged Family Court proceedings, invoking the Hague Convention, claiming the child was wrongfully removed to New Zealand and that, at the time of the removal, they were habitually resident in Australia.

The mother denied the claims. Judge Doyle said an unusual aspect of the case was that the parents separated before the father, and possibly the mother, knew of the pregnancy.

If the child had been born on the due date, the mother says they would have been in New Zealand, and the father would not have been able to call on the Hague Convention.

“Counsel were not aware of, and I have not been able to find, any other cases with an analogous fact scenario,” the judge noted.

However, she ruled in favour of the father, concluding the child had been born in Australia and had lived there. before being removed.

Yesterday, the father spoke of his heartbreak at being separated from his child.

“Seeing [the child] every day, we’d formed that special bond. It’s been so tough,” he told the Herald. “[The child] needs to come back here, which is home.”

The mother appealed to the High Court, saying the decision was wrong and contained errors of fact and law. It was filed out of time but she applied for a time extension.