header-logo header-logo

26 July 2024 / Victoria Rylatt , Sarah Hughes
Issue: 8081 / Categories: Features , Family , Divorce
printer mail-detail

Relocation matters

183116
Victoria Rylatt & Sarah Hughes provide a review of recent cases dealing with child relocation both inside & outside the jurisdiction
  • The first section of this article deals with internal relocation. Both cases involve a mother who wished to relocate with the child.
  • The second section deals with relocation to other jurisdictions, and include reference to R v Lucas, relating to findings of generalised dishonesty.

Child relocation cases remain difficult and often finely balanced. In this article we will summarise recent cases which have involved applications to relocate with children both within and outside of the jurisdiction.

Internal relocation

F v M [2023] EWFC 147

This concerned a girl, S, who was nearly four. Both parents applied for a child arrangements order, the father applied for a prohibited steps order, and the mother applied for a specific issue order seeking a proposed relocation from Borough A to Borough B (where the mother had already moved).

Within the section 7 report, Cafcass recommended the interim arrangements continue. However, the addendum report

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll