Clare Renton reports on a sea change in international relocation cases
The decision of the Court of Appeal in MK v CK [2011] EWCA Civ 793, [2011] All ER (D) 67 (Jul) has further eroded what was regarded by practitioners as principle in relocation cases. In effect the likely distress to the mother from refusal of permission to relocate over other aspects of the welfare checklist is no longer elevated. What was established in Payne v Payne as principle is now mere guidance (see [2001] EWCA Civ 166, [2001] All ER (D) 142 (Feb)).
Case background
In MK a Canadian mother of children aged four and two wished to return home to Canada after the breakdown of her marriage. The father had care of the children five days in a 14-day cycle or 35.7% of the time. The CAFCASS report recognised that the mother felt isolated and lonely in England but recommended on balance that the application should be refused: the damage to the children arising from the inevitable reduction
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
