Writing in NLJ this week, Linda Ong of Engelin Teh Practice LLC and Lola Ajayi of Anthony Gold Solicitors LLP compare the approaches taken in both jurisdictions.
Despite differing legal frameworks, the message is similar: there is no presumption in favour of relocation, even where the applicant is the primary carer. Instead, judges focus on a rigorous welfare assessment grounded in evidence and practical realities.
Recent cases demonstrate that carefully prepared plans involving stable housing, schooling and support networks can succeed, while poorly evidenced proposals often fail. Courts also remain sceptical that technology can adequately replace face-to-face parenting, warning against reducing one parent to a mere ‘holiday parent’.
The authors conclude that successful applications depend on realistic planning, strategic foresight and a child-centred approach rather than parental preference.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=28793f10_1)
