Hague Convention — application to return child — Australia — grave risk — child objection — purpose of Hague Convention — views of child — intolerable situation — fundamental rights. The father sought to have the parties' children returned to Australia after the mother relocated without discussing the move with him. When the mother arrived in New Zealand, she obtained interim orders for day to day care, and preventing the removal of the children. The mother agreed that the children were ordinarily resident in Australia. The mother opposed the application for return, arguing that the children objected to the return and that to return them would place them in an intolerable situation. She also argued that return was not permitted by "fundamental principles of New Zealand law relating to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms" which the court summarily rejected. The court found that there was no grave or substantial risk that the children's return to Australia will expose them to physical or psychological harm with reference to, among other things, the similarities between the New Zealand and Australian justice systems; the fact that the mother had agreed to the father having unsupervised contact during a recent visit; and the fact that there were no protection orders against the father or signs that he would breach a protection order if one was made. The defence of grave risk accordingly failed. In respect of the second defence, the children's views, the court set out the way in which a child's views are ascertained and when a child could be considered to have sufficient maturity, as well as what is meant by an "objection" by a child. The court acknowledged that there had been a lot of tension between the parties and that it would have caused the children to be unhappy at times; however the court found that there was no evidence to support the children objecting to returning to Australia or having contact with their father. As the defences raised by the mother had failed, the court ordered that the children were to return to Australia. Judgment Date: 11 December 2017. * * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *