Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

RELOCATION: Re TC and JC (Children: Relocation) [2013] EWHC 292 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:01 PM
Slug : relocation-re-tc-and-jc-children-relocation-2013-ewhc-292-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 5, 2013, 02:34 AM
Article ID : 101791

(Family Division, Mostyn J, 21 February 2013)

When the Australian mother and British father faced marriage difficulties the mother, without warning the father, took the two children, aged 2 and 3, and flew to Australia. Following Hague Convention proceedings in Australia the children were returned to this jurisdiction and were cared for under a shared care arrangement. The mother now sought permission to relocate.

The Cafcass officer was unable to provide a clear recommendation to the court and was unable to say where the balance lay. The parents agreed that whatever the outcome they would provide a shared care arrangement and the unsuccessful parent would relocate in order to do so.

In the circumstances the mother's capacity to meet the children's needs would be diminished if she were required to stay in the UK partly due to the complex immigration requirements and also due to her potential bankruptcy. Applying the guidance, the impact on the mother, if a decision favourable to the father were made, would bear far more heavily on her than the father in the alternative situation. 

 

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from