S v G (Relocation to Russia)
It is in Daniel's best interests for the mother's relocation application to be granted, as the long-term advantages of resuming her role as primary carer in Russia outweigh the short-term disadvantages of separation from the father and paternal family. The mother is more dynamic and capable, and arrangements for regular contact with the father are enforceable and practical.
- Parties
- Applicant/mother: S; Respondent/father: G
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 14 January 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Family / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Mother's application to relocate granted; child arrangements order made.
- Legal Topics
- Child Arrangements, Relocation, Parental Responsibility, Contact Orders, Jurisdiction
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
S
Applicant/mother
G
Respondent/father
Procedural Posture
Family / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mother should be permitted to relocate with the child to Russia
- 2 What arrangements should be made for the child's contact with the father
- 3 Assessment of parental capacity and impact of relocation
Ratio Decidendi
It is in Daniel's best interests for the mother's relocation application to be granted, as the long-term advantages of resuming her role as primary carer in Russia outweigh the short-term disadvantages of separation from the father and paternal family. The mother is more dynamic and capable, and arrangements for regular contact with the father are enforceable and practical.
Court Disposition
Mother's application to relocate granted; child arrangements order made.
Orders
- Daniel shall live with the applicant mother.
- Mother permitted to remove Daniel permanently from England to Russia on or about 8 February 2015.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment