DCB v. AB

DCB v. AB

Applying the paramountcy of the child's welfare and weighing social worker assessments, evidential findings and practical realities, relocation to Singapore was refused as not presently in the child's best interests due to high parental conflict, the child's current settled situation in Hong Kong, uncertainties...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
DCB v. AB
Parties
Plaintiff (father): DCB; Defendant (mother): AB
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
16 May 2017
Case Number
HCMP2173/2014
Procedural Posture
Wardship/guardianship/custody and Relocation Proceedings / Judgment After Full Trial (order Issued 16 May 2017)
Outcome
Mother's relocation application refused; Mother granted sole care and control; child to remain a ward of the Court; defined access schedule ordered; directions given for financial provision and costs submissions.
Legal Topics
Best Interests of the Child, Care and Control, Relocation, Wardship, Interim Access, Jurisdiction and Parallel Proceedings, Social Welfare Reports, Costs
Source Language
en
Family Law Guardianship Child Custody International Child Abduction / Hague Convention Relocation Law Maintenance Procedure Best Interests of the Child +7 more

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DCB

Plaintiff (father)

AB

Defendant (mother)

Procedural Posture

Wardship/guardianship/custody and Relocation Proceedings / Judgment After Full Trial (order Issued 16 May 2017)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant Mother leave to relocate the child to Singapore permanently
  2. 2 Whether to grant joint care and control or sole care and control and variation of prior custody order
  3. 3 What access/contact regime is in the child's best interests if relocation refused or granted

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the paramountcy of the child's welfare and weighing social worker assessments, evidential findings and practical realities, relocation to Singapore was refused as not presently in the child's best interests due to high parental conflict, the child's current settled situation in Hong Kong, uncertainties about long term arrangements and supervision in Singapore; however, on balance the Mother was found the more suitable primary carer and the 19.05.15 custody order was varied to grant Mother sole care and control with a defined access regime for the Father and the child to remain a ward of the court until further order.

Court Disposition

Mother's relocation application refused; Mother granted sole care and control; child to remain a ward of the Court; defined access schedule ordered; directions given for financial provision and costs submissions.

Orders

  • Vary the 19.05.15 Custody Order: Mother granted sole care and control of L
  • Access to Father defined: Week 1: Friday after school to Monday before school; Week 2: one overnight at weekend; flexible day access with at least one weekday dinner; daily telephone/Skype contact (once morning and once before sleep) subject to agreement; equal sharing of school holidays; alternate L's birthday and...