Leo, Jennifer And Nathan (INTERNATIONAL RELOCATION) [2020] NIFam 26 (10 December 2020)

Leo, Jennifer And Nathan (INTERNATIONAL RELOCATION) [2020] NIFam 26 (10 December 2020)

The application for relocation was refused because the mother's plans for resettlement in New Zealand were not sufficiently robust or coherent, there was a lack of support structure for her there, and the children had not been given an opportunity to settle in Northern Ireland. The court found that the welfare of the children, particularly their need for stability and the maintenance of their relationship with both parents, would not be best served by relocation at this time.

Citation
[2020] NIFam 26
Parties
Applicant: SA; Respondent: MA; Children: Leo, Jennifer and Nathan (children, represented by Official Solicitor)
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
10 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Family Law International Relocation and Contact / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Relocation application refused; contact application adjourned for further discussion.
Legal Topics
International Relocation, Child Welfare, Contact Orders, Residence Orders, Parental Responsibility
Family Law Child Law International Relocation Child Welfare Contact Orders Residence Orders Parental Responsibility

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SA

Applicant

MA

Respondent

Leo, Jennifer and Nathan (children, represented by Official Solicitor)

Children

Procedural Posture

Family Law International Relocation and Contact / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the mother should be permitted to relocate with the children to New Zealand
  2. 2 Whether the current contact arrangements should be altered

Ratio Decidendi

The application for relocation was refused because the mother's plans for resettlement in New Zealand were not sufficiently robust or coherent, there was a lack of support structure for her there, and the children had not been given an opportunity to settle in Northern Ireland. The court found that the welfare of the children, particularly their need for stability and the maintenance of their relationship with both parents, would not be best served by relocation at this time.

Court Disposition

Relocation application refused; contact application adjourned for further discussion.

Orders

  • Refusal of the mother's application to relocate the children to New Zealand.
  • Adjournment of the father's contact application to allow parties to discuss arrangements and forum for future hearings.