In the last 10 years the Family Court of Australia (Family Court) saw a rapid increase in the number of applications seeking approval for the commencement of Stage 1 and/or Stage 2 hormone treatment for children with Gender Dysphoria.[1] The number of applications each year decreased significantly due to the impact of the 2017 decision of the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia (Full Court) in Re Kelvin.[2] In this case, the Full Court determined that except in cases of "controversy", generally court approval is not required for the commencement of Stage 1 and/or Stage 2 treatment for Gender Dysphoria in minors, nor is an application necessary for the purpose to confirming the minor's capacity to make their own decision about treatment. Despite the outcome of this decision, there are some circumstances where court approval is still a requirement in such cases. Recent case law has considered the ongoing role of the court in relation to the decision to administer hormone treatment for Gender Dysphoria[3] and the post-Kelvin decisions in this field are relevant to clarifying when an application to court is required. An example of such a decision is the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland concerning an application for approval to commence Stage 1 treatment for a minor with Gender Dysphoria.[4] This Queensland case is interesting because the significant body of case law that has developed in this field is Family Court jurisprudence rather than decisions of the State and Territory Supreme Courts. Recent case law considers the issue of when it is necessary to involve the court in decisions about hormone treatment for minors with Gender Dysphoria, despite the general approach adopted by the Full Court in Re Kelvin. A question also arises as to when an application to the Supreme Court may be appropriate rather than an application to the Family Court.