G v H (Relocation to Australia: Immigration Issues)
[2024] EWFC 230 (B)
I (A Child) (Relocation: Australia), Re
5 January 2024
[2024] EWFC 3 (B)
Family Court
A mom wants to move to Australia with her child. The dad doesn't want them to go. The judge listened to everyone and decided it was best for the child to move to Australia because the child wanted to and the mom would be happier there. The judge made sure the dad would still see the child regularly through video calls and visits.
Key Facts
- •Applicant mother (P) seeks to relocate with child (I) to Australia.
- •Respondent father (R) opposes the relocation.
- •I is nearly 10 years old and has autism and dyspraxia diagnoses.
- •The parents have a history of domestic abuse and conflict.
- •Both parents are well-paid and financially capable of supporting I.
- •I has expressed a strong wish to live in Australia.
- •R works in Paris and his availability for contact in the UK is uncertain.
Legal Principles
The child's welfare is paramount.
Children Act 1989, s1(3)
Maintaining a relationship with both parents is presumed to be in the child's best interests.
Children Act 1989
Relocation decisions must be subject to a proportionality evaluation.
Outcomes
Permission granted for P to relocate with I to Australia.
Balancing the child's wishes, the mother's well-being, the practicality of relocation, and the potential for maintaining contact with R, the court concludes that relocation is in I's best interests. The court finds that a workable contact schedule can be implemented.
Lives with order in favour of P.
Reflects the primary care role P has with I.
Spending time with order in favour of R.
Specific contact arrangements detailed, including regular video calls and extended visits every 8-10 weeks, to be facilitated through P’s efforts and R’s financial means.