Father v Mother & Ors [2022] EWFC 204 (05 July 2022)

Father v Mother & Ors [2022] EWFC 204 (05 July 2022)

The court refused both the father's application to relocate Eve to Country A and the mother's application for Eve to live with her, finding that Eve's welfare is best served by remaining living with her father in the UK, with a structured contact regime with her mother. The risk of loss of relationship with the mother and the history of the father's non-compliance and controlling behaviour made relocation unsafe. The mother's proposal lacked stability and would separate Eve from her siblings against her wishes. A Prohibited Steps Order was necessary to prevent removal to non-Hague Convention countries, and a section 91(14) Order was justified to prevent further litigation without leave.

Citation
[2022] EWFC 204
Parties
Applicant: Father; First Respondent: Mother; Second Respondent: Children (via the Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Family Law – Child Arrangements and Relocation / Final Judgment
Outcome
Father's application to relocate refused; mother's application for Eve to live with her refused; Prohibited Steps Order and section 91(14) Order granted.
Legal Topics
International Relocation, Child Arrangements, Prohibited Steps Order, Section 91(14) Order, Welfare of the Child
Family Law International Relocation Child Arrangements Prohibited Steps Order Section 91(14) Order Welfare of the Child

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Father

Applicant

Mother

First Respondent

Children (via the Guardian)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law – Child Arrangements and Relocation / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the father should be permitted to relocate with Eve to Country A
  2. 2 Whether Eve should live with the mother
  3. 3 What contact Eve should have with her mother if both relocation and live with applications are refused

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused both the father's application to relocate Eve to Country A and the mother's application for Eve to live with her, finding that Eve's welfare is best served by remaining living with her father in the UK, with a structured contact regime with her mother. The risk of loss of relationship with the mother and the history of the father's non-compliance and controlling behaviour made relocation unsafe. The mother's proposal lacked stability and would separate Eve from her siblings against her wishes. A Prohibited Steps Order was necessary to prevent removal to non-Hague Convention countries, and a section 91(14) Order was justified to prevent further litigation without leave.

Court Disposition

Father's application to relocate refused; mother's application for Eve to live with her refused; Prohibited Steps Order and section 91(14) Order granted.

Orders

  • Father's application to relocate Eve to Country A refused.
  • Mother's application for Eve to live with her refused.