Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles
Authors

Re M (Children) [2016] EWCA Civ 1059

Sep 29, 2018, 19:32 PM
Private law children – Relocation – Permission to relocate to Moscow – Appeal
The father’s appeal from a decision permitting the mother and children to relocate to Moscow was dismissed.
Slug : re-m-children-2016-ewca-civ-1059
Meta Title : Re M (Children) [2016] EWCA Civ 1059
Meta Keywords : Private law children – Relocation – Permission to relocate to Moscow – Appeal
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 9, 2016, 04:48 AM
Article ID : 113331

(Court of Appeal, Underhill, King LJJ, 1 November 2016)

Private law children – Relocation – Permission to relocate to Moscow – Appeal

The father’s appeal from a decision permitting the mother and children to relocate to Moscow was dismissed.

The parents of the two children, now aged 10 and 12, met in Moscow before relocating to the UK. They separated in 2011 and since then they had been engaged in extensive litigation regarding the living arrangements of the children.

The mother sought to move to Moscow with the children due to an offer of employment there and an opportunity to relocate the business she was running with her new husband. Her application was allowed. The husband appealed.

The appeal was dismissed. The judge had referred to earlier case law including the authority of Payne v Payne [2001] EWCA Civ 166 but that did not lead to his judgment being tainted by the previous confusion surrounding that line of authorities. He had specifically referred to the fact that the only determining factor in his decision was the children’s welfare and he had accordingly analysed the factors pertaining to that.

The Court of Appeal applied the criteria set out in Re F (Relocation) [2012] EWCA Civ 1364 and found that the judgment was adequate in terms of enabling the parties to understand why the decision was reached and provided sufficient detail to enable the CA to determine whether it was sustainable.

The judge’s approach to the mother’s reasons for relocating had been beyond reproach. He found correctly that there was no requirement for the mother to demonstrate economic necessity in order to succeed in her application and that to do so would place the type of additional gloss on the test to be applied that had been expressly rejected in K v K (Relocation) (Shared Care Arrangement) [2011] EWCA Civ 793. The judge had been entitled to conclude that the mother should be permitted to pursue career opportunities overseas if that was consistent with the children’s welfare needs which included maintaining their relationship with the father.



Case No: B4/2016/2769

Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1059
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT (FAMILY DIVISION)
HIS HONOUR JUDGE WALLWORK
ZC1414P00526

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL


Date: 01/11/2016


Before:

LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL

and

LADY JUSTICE KING

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Between:

M (Children)


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Charles Geekie QC and Perican Tahir (instructed by Sears Tooth, Solicitors) for the Appellant
Deborah Eaton QC and Nicholas Anderson (instructed by Withers LLP) for the Respondent

Hearing date: Wednesday 21 September 2016


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Judgment


Re M (Children) [2016] EWCA Civ 1059.rtf
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Private Law Children
Tags :
FLR_cover
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from