Guardianship dispute — overseas travel — vaccination — immunisation — ADT — Diptheria-Tetanus — MMR — measles — autoimmune issues — expert advice — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 4 & 46. The parties were in a guardianship dispute over the vaccinations of their child. Father had refused to consent to the child traveling overseas until she had been fully vaccinated and immunised. He wanted the child to be vaccinated as soon as possible in a mainstream manner. The mother wanted the child to have her vaccinations with an expert immunologist in Australia. Reasons for this included the child's past autoimmune issues and that her uncle had had reactions to vaccinations but was successfully treated by this doctor. She proposed to cover the costs of travel and treatment without being reimbursed by the father. The father wanted the vaccinations to occur immediately, but mother wanted to wait as the child was recovering from a viral infection and so she could take supplements to ensure her immune system was at its best at the time of vaccination. The Judge found it was in the welfare and best interests for the child to have her vaccinations as proposed by the mother, in line with the advice of the medical expert. Father had provided no medical evidence to support his claim that the child had to be vaccinated immediately as a matter of life or death. Vaccinating the child while she was ill was a risk to her health and the medical expert had formulated a plan with regard to the child's age, lifestyle and history. The mother also sought to vary the parenting order so she could have longer periods in Australia but the Judge declined to grant that order at the time due to the ongoing litigation concerning final parenting orders. Judgment Date: 6 September 2019. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *