header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
18 March 2016 / Angelina Milon , Kim Beatson
Issue: 7691 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Moving on

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
001_nlj_7691_beatson-milon

Kim Beatson & Angelina Milon provide an update on leave to remove cases

In the decade or so since Payne v Payne [2001] EWCA Civ 166, [2001] All ER (D) 142 (Feb), the case law in this area has moved on with several eminent judges keen to leave their own imprint in this often tragic area of law.

Recent cases have rejected the idea that Payne sets out any presumptions in deciding relocation cases. They have emphasised that the only real principle to be taken from Payne is that the welfare of the child is paramount, whether it is statutorily required or not. These cases have focused the jurisprudence on the welfare of the child and the need to carry out a “holistic evaluative analysis” taking all factors relevant to relocation into account. K v K (Children permanent removal from jurisdiction) [2011] EWCA Civ 793, [2011] All ER (D) 67 (Jul) and Re F (Relocation) [2012] EWCA Civ 1364, [2012] All ER (D) 261 (Oct), contain the modern law on external relocation and are

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026—the winners!
The winners of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026 have now been announced, marking another outstanding celebration of excellence, innovation, and impact across the legal profession
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll