Date: 5 October 2011
Author: Elizabeth Sneade

Historically when there are shared care arrangements, the parent who wanted to move abroad whether for personal or work reasons had the upper hand. The caveat was that plans had to be fully thought out (schools researched, housing viable etc) and promises that children would still have contact with the other parent – even if that was predominantly via skype rather than in person. The parent not wanting to move abroad would often feel like they had little say in the decision as the parent wanting to move would argue that their ‘distress’ if refused would impact on the children so much it would be detrimental.

A recent case in the Court of Appeal Re K (children) has turned the old way of thinking upside down. Mum was Canadian, Dad was Polish, but they had both relocated to England and had two daughters here and separated in July 2010. Mum wanted permission to return to Canada with the children. The children had a shared residence order and spent five days (six nights) with their Dad in every 14. Dad opposed the move as he said he would lose his relationship with his children and they would no longer have the shared care of their parents. Mum in this case was refused permission to relocate.

It is a mistake to think of leave to remove cases as a contest between one ‘distressed’ parent and the ‘two parents are better than one’ argument. All relevant factors have to be considered and weighed in the balance, in particular the wishes and feelings of the children involved. The end result is that any parent with a shared care arrangement will now find it far more difficult to persuade a court to grant permission to relocate out of the jurisdiction.

If you need individual advice in relation to any aspect of family law, the team at Ashton KCJ will be happy to help.  Please contact Elisabeth Sneade in Cambridge, Mary Pearce in Bury St Edmunds, Stephen Williams in Ipswich or Sue Bailey in Norwich.