![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |
England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges) |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges) >> K, Re (Internal Relocation) [2025] EWFC 285 (B) (08 September 2025) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWFC/OJ/2025/285.html Cite as: [2025] EWFC 285 (B) |
||
[New search]
[Context
]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable PDF version]
[Help]
be
published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must
be
strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will
be
a contempt of court. EWFC 285 ( B) | ||
SITTING AT NOTTINGHAM
Nottingham, NG2 1EE |
||
B
e f o r e :
____________________
| RE K (INTERNAL RELOCATION) |
____________________
by
Bhatia
Best)
for the Applicant
Harriet Jones (instructed
by
Sills &
Betteridge
Solicitors) for the Respondent
Hearing dates: 22 August 2025 and 8 September 2025
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
This judgment was handed down remotely
by
the Judge
by
circulation to the parties' representatives
by
email and release to The National Archives. The date and time for hand-down is deemed to
be
2:00pm on 8 September 2025.
Mr Recorder O'Grady:
Introduction
born
on { } 2022. K is 3 years { } months old.
born
on { } 1990. He is the Applicant.
born
on { } 2001. She is the Respondent.
before
Lay Justices. On 17 March 2025, a little over 10 weeks
before
the application was to
be
heard, the Mother filed a C2 application seeking permission to relocate the child "to the { North West } area". The hearing
before
the Lay Justices was vacated and the applications were listed to
be
heard
before
me on 22 August 2024. This is the judgment of the Court following the hearing of the parents' applications.
Brief
Background
been
cared for
by
the Mother.
by
consent that K spend time with the Father from 6:00pm on Fridays until 4:00pm on Sundays each alternate week. That arrangement has persisted to date.
behaviour
by
the Father and alleges (in general terms) that the Father was controlling. I have and will have regard to Practice Direction 12J in my determination of the welfare issues.
Both
parents said that none were required.
What is Agreed
a. K's Easter holiday willbe
shared equally with K
being
with each of the parents for one week, with the Easter Sunday alternating. In 2026, K will spend Easter Sunday with the Father and in 2027 K will spend Easter Sunday with the Mother. This arrangement will then alternate each year.
b. K's time during Christmas holidays willbe
shared equally
between
the parents, with the 23-27 December
being
alternated
between
the parents on an annual
basis.
In 2025, K will spend 23-27 December with the Mother and in 2026 K shall spend 23-27 December with the Father.
c. K's October half-term willbe
shared equally
between
the parents, with a handover on the midweek day. K will spend the whole of the February half-term with the Father and the whole of the May half-term with the Mother.
d. K shall spend two weeks in his summer holidays with the Father, on dates and times tobe
agreed
between
the parents.
e. On Mothers' Day and Fathers' Day, K will spend time with the respective parent from 6:00pm on Saturday until 4:00pm on Sunday, with the other parent facilitating handovers.
f. If the relocation is permitted, in addition to time during holidays, K will spend alternating Fridays to Sundays with the Father.
The Issues
be
determined are:
a. whether K's relocation from Nottingham to the { North West } area is in his
best
interests;
b.
what division of K's time
between
his parents is in his
best
interests; and
c. what type of child arrangements order to reflect the division of time is in K's
best
interests.
Key Features of the Written and Oral Evidence Including Assessment of Witnesses
be
a repetition of everything I considered and my failure to recite a particular part of the evidence does not reflect a failure on my part to consider it. What follows is only intended to
be
a summary.
{ The Family Court Adviser }
by
her colleague { Cafcass Employee 1 } and a section 7 report prepared
by
her colleague { Cafcass Employee 2 }.
be
supported. She described the decision as "finely
balanced".
In the FCA's opinion the proposal to relocate has merit and K will cope well with the change.
be
given significant weight. The Father submits the analysis is deficient and there is ample reason for concluding the FCA's opinions ought not
be
preferred.
be
approved. I regret I must conclude the clear impression left
by
the FCA's evidence was that the first time it occurred to her that she had undertaken an insufficient analysis was when she was asked questions
by
the Court at the conclusion of her evidence.
be
if he remained in Nottingham or make recommendations for K should he remain in Nottingham. Even when given the opportunity to reflect, the FCA struggled to articulate any proper proposals for K's relationship with the Father if K is to remain in Nottingham. Regrettably, I must find FCA never got to grips with what K stood to lose
by
the relocation taking place.
being
qualified
by
the Mother's contentions coming to proof. For example, the FCA accepted at face value the Mother's case that (A) there was a network of support for the Mother in { the North West } area when there is no evidence from anyone in that network as to precisely what support they can provide and the FCA did not speak to them; and (
B)
the FCA accepted at face value that there are greater opportunities for { }, the Mother's Husband ("the Husband") in the absence of any corroborating material.
between
the parents that the Mother did in fact do so.
be
asked to focus on what was asked. I have come to the clear conclusion that I must
be
cautious in giving weight to the FCA's judgment and analysis.
The Mother
been
in a relationship for two years. They have
been
married for one year. The Mother and the Husband have one child together. The Mother is studying { } through the { }. I learn from the FCA that the Husband is a { }. He told the FCA he was looking for jobs in { }. The Husband works in an office in Nottinghamshire two days each week and the remainder of the time he works from home.
be
in the { North West } area
because
that is where the Husband's family are. She says they will support her,
but
other than saying they would
be
an emotional support she failed to say how she and K would
be
supported
by
them. The Mother has looked at housing in the { North West } area. She says she can obtain a more comfortable home for less money than she can in Nottingham and provided some property particulars.
been
speaking about moving to the { North West } area for a couple of years, that evidence was not persuasive. The Mother failed to satisfactorily explain why it was not until a matter of weeks prior to the vacated final hearing that she raised the prospect of relocation. The Mother's plans struck as more recently formed, rather than
being
a long-standing settled intention.
B)
who the extended family members in { the North West } area are; (C) where those family members live relative to where the Mother intends to live; (D) what her, the Husband's and K's relationships are with each of those family members in { the North West area }(
besides
saying K "has enjoyed spending time with them"); (E) what support the family members in { the North West area } (can actually provide; or (F) her alternative plan should the Court refuse to give her the permission she seeks.
B)
what work opportunities there are in the { North West } area; (C) why his work cannot
be
done combined with remote working; (D) what efforts he has made to obtain alternative work; or (E) the nature of his relationship with his relatives in { the North West area }.
B)
the relationship they have with the Mother, the Husband and K.
by
moving. I found her reflections to
be
superficial. For example, there is no evidence she has meaningfully engaged with how she and the Husband would manage if the Husband does not secure work or if she is unable to slot into the lives of the Husband's relatives in the { North West } area. It is apparent she sees her relocation as a panacea and did not offer any reflections on challenges she may face. Moreover, only very recently have she and the Husband thought about what they would do if her application is refused.
be
honest in her
beliefs,
she impressed as
being
immature. I consider there is a level of naivety to her views, such as her view that K's relocation will have limited impact on his relationship with the Father. Whilst she told me and the FCA that her desire to relocate has
been
on her mind for years, I was unpersuaded that was so. Rather, I find the Mother's intention to relocate is recently formed. There was no satisfactory explanation for why her desire to relocate was communicated so late in these proceedings, if it had
been
even a somewhat settled intention. She went through the entire process of a section 7 report without mentioning a desire to relocate. I am not satisfied the Mother's plans are seriously thought through or well considered.
The Father
be
a { }. The Father lives in one-
bedroom
property. When K stays with the Father, K sleeps in a separate
bed
within the Father's
bedroom.
broad
terms that there are "
benefits"
to the Husband having family in the { North West } area he conceded there were. However, no specific
benefits
were put to him and it is difficult to see how any could have
been
when the Mother's evidence did not identify any.
be
a significant change for K. In that respect, he did not reflect as a person with satisfactory insight into K's present developmental needs.
but
was instead a result of his honestly held
belief
that the relocation would not
be
in K's
best
interests.
Legal Principles
Factual Disputes
burden
of proof on all disputes of fact lies with the person claiming the fact to
be
true. The standard of proof is a simple
balance
of probabilities. Whether an assertion of fact is true is
binary.
If the standard of proof is met, then the assertion is fact and treated so for my decision-making. If the standard of proof is not met, then the assertion is not a fact for my decision-making. There is no room for treating suspicion as fact for the purposes of my decision-making.
be
based
on evidence, including inferences reasonably drawn from the evidence and not speculation. That evidence can
be
written or oral and I can rely on hearsay evidence from witnesses who have not given oral evidence. However, I must consider carefully what weight to give that hearsay evidence as I have not had the opportunity to consider how it would have stood up to challenge
by
cross-examination.
Baroness
Hale cautioned on fact-finding in private law proceedings in W Children [2010] UKSC 12 at [29]:
"…there are specific risks to which the court mustbe
alive. Allegations of abuse are not
being
made
by
a neutral and expert Local Authority which has nothing to gain
by
making them,
but
![]()
by
a parent who is seeking to gain an advantage in the
battle
against the other parent. This does not mean that they are false,
but
it does increase the risk of misinterpretation, exaggeration or downright fabrication"
Welfare
been
my paramount consideration. I assess his
best
interests within the context of the considerations in section 1(3) of the Children Act 1989 ("the Act").
be
treated as
benefiting
from that presumption unless there is some evidence
before
the court to suggest that the involvement of the parent in the child's life would put the child at risk of suffering harm.
be
better
for K than making no order at all, or no less draconian order. Delay in resolving a question about K's welfare, especially in proceedings as long-running as these, is detrimental to the welfare of the children.
be
taken as
between
internal and external relocation cases (Re C (Internal Relocation) [2017] 1 FLR 103). The only authentic principle is the paramount welfare of the child. In either type of relocation case, external or internal, it is helpful to consider the matters referred to in Payne v Payne [2001] 1 FLR 1052;
but
not as a prescriptive
blueprint;
rather and merely as a checklist of the sort of factors which will or may need to
be
weighed in the
balance
when determining which decision would
better
serve the welfare of the child.
by
Thorpe LJ (at [85]) to
be
relevant to the determination of the relocation issue were:
"(a) The welfare of the child is always paramount.
(b) There is no presumption createdby
section 13(1)(
b)
in favour of the applicant parent.
(c) The reasonable proposals of the parent with a residence order wishing to live abroad carry great weight.
(d) Consequently the proposals have tobe
scrutinised with care and the court needs to
be
satisfied that there is a genuine motivation for the move and not the intention to
bring
contact
between
the child and the other parent to an end.
(e) The effect upon the applicant parent and the new family of the child of a refusal of leave is very important.
(f) The effect upon the child of the denial of contact with the other parent and in some cases his family is very important.
(g) The opportunity for continuing contactbetween
the child and the parent left
behind
may
be
very significant."
by
Thorpe LJ are not the anchor to which the decision is to
be
tethered. In Re F (A child) (International Relocation Case) [2015] EWCA Civ 882 Ryder LJ said that (at [18]):
"The questions identified in Payne may or may notbe
relevant on the facts of an individual case and the court will
be
![]()
better
placed if it concentrates not on assumptions or preconceptions
but
on the statutory welfare question which is
before
it ..."
"Each realistic option for the welfare of a child shouldbe
validly considered on its own internal merits (i.e. an analysis of the welfare factors relating to each option should
be
undertaken). That prevents one option (often in a relocation case the proposals from the absent or 'left
behind'
parent) from
being
sidelined in a linear analysis. Not only is it necessary to consider
both
parents' proposals on their own merits and
by
reference to what the child has to say
but
it is also necessary to consider the options side
by
side in a comparative evaluation. A proposal that may have some
but
no particular merit on its own may still
be
![]()
better
than the only other alternative which is worse."
behind'
proposal is the trap fallen into
by
the FCA as a result of the linear analysis.
Domestic Abuse
behaviour,
violence or abuse
between
those aged 16 or over who are personally connected within the meaning of section 2 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021.
but
is not limited to, psychological, physical, sexual, economic or emotional abuse. Economic abuse means any
behaviour
that has a substantial adverse effect on the other's person's ability to acquire, use or maintain money or other property, goods or services.
behaviour
includes an act or a pattern of acts of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten their victim.
behaviour
includes an act or pattern of acts designed to make a person subordinate and/or dependent
by
isolating them from sources of support, exploiting their resources and capacities for personal gain, depriving them of the means needed for independence, resistance and escape and regulating their everyday
behaviour.
by
the definition of domestic abuse in Practice Direction 12J recognises that coercive and/or controlling
behaviour
by
one party may cause serious emotional and psychological harm to members of the family unit, whether or not there has
been
any actual episode of violence or abuse.
behaviour
can
be
as abusive or more abusive than any particular factual incident that might
be
written down and included in a schedule in court proceedings. It follows that the harm to a child in an abusive household is not limited to cases of actual violence to the child or to the parents. A pattern of abusive
behaviour
is as relevant to the child as to the adult victim. A child can
be
harmed in any one or a combination of ways.
be
clear that not all directive, assertive, stubborn or selfish
behaviour,
will
be
'abuse' in the context of proceedings concerning the welfare of a child. Much will turn on the intention of the perpetrator of the alleged abuse and on the harmful impact of the
behaviour.
There is no
bright
line that defines what kind of
behaviour
can properly
be
characterised as coercive and controlling
Factual Determinations
behaviour"
and that the Father dictated to her the time that K should spend with him. The Mother allegations were pleaded in general terms, which did not aid the identification of the specific
behaviour
and how that impacted her.
a. In December 2023 the Father reported seeing a small mark under K's eye and that the Mother reported to the Father that it hadbeen
caused
by
a dog. Nowhere within her evidence does the Mother contest there
being
such a mark or that she said to the Father it was caused
by
a dog. It is difficult to accept this could
be
characterised as malicious when the Father expressly stated he was not worried for K's welfare;
b. In January 2024 the Father requested a safe and well check on Ko after the Mother stopped K spending time with him. He did not otherwise report a threat of abuse of K or any cause for concern. In the context of the Mother unliterally stopping K's time with the Father and the Father having limited information about his wellbeing, I do not accept this canbe
characterised as an episode of abusive
behaviour
![]()
by
the Father.
c. On an unknown date the Father alleged K displayed sexualisedbehaviours,
such as humping and using toys in sexualised ways.
behaviour.
However, the Mother has not proved the Father engaged in abusive
behaviour,
including controlling or coercive
behaviour.
Besides
the very general contentions the Mother alleged, at no time did the Mother put any matter relating to domestic abuse (even at its most general) to the Father in cross-examination. The Cafcass safeguarding letter records that the local authority was unable to substantiate the Mother's claims of abuse. The Mother has not satisfied me that the Father's reports were made other than in good faith. In December 2023 he expressly stated he was not worried about K's welfare, contraindicating a malicious complaint. His request for a safe and well check in January 2024 was understandable in circumstances where his time with K was abruptly halted. It is more likely the Father, not having a fully formed understanding of K's development, misinterpreted developmentally typical
behaviour
as sexualised.
by
an overly anxious disposition on the part of the Mother, rather than an intention to deny K a relationship with the Father. The observed strength of K's relationship with the Father contraindicates that relationship
being
sabotaged
by
the Mother.
being
able to spend more time with the Father during terms than Fridays to Sundays in alternate weeks. She is not attuned to K's capacity to adapt to change anchored
by
the strength of his relationship with the Father.
Welfare Determination
Welfare Findings
The ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned (considered in light of his age and understanding)
be
ascertained. He presents as attached to
both
of his parents.
Physical, emotional and educational needs
best
interests.
Age, sex,
background
and any characteristics of which the court considers relevant
How capable the Mother is of meeting his needs
bond.
The Mother is undoubtedly his primary attachment. The Mother did not consistently meet K's need for a relationship with the Father when she abruptly stopped the time spent
between
them. That change would likely have negatively impacted K's emotional wellbeing and caused him confusion.
How capable the Father is of meeting his needs
being
agreed that K can spend long extended periods with the Father in holiday periods (notwithstanding his young age). K feels safe around the Father, which reflects the Father's capability of meeting K's emotional needs. K has a close and loving
bond
with the Father.
belief
that K could immediately move to an equal time arrangement without it impacting K reflects an unsatisfactory understanding of how K would
be
negatively impacted
by
rapid change in his relationship with his primary attachment figure.
Any harm which he has suffered or is at risk of suffering
by
which K may suffer emotional harm. First,
by
the vicarious impact on him of his primary carer having her wish to relocate unrealised. Secondly,
by
his relationship with the Father
being
constrained
by
tyranny of their distance from each other should K
be
relocated to the { North West } area. As to the first of these risks, the Mother's counsel conceded that if the relocation was not approved then she would "make it work".
The likely effect on him of any change in his circumstances
Identification of Realistic Options
a. K relocate with the Mother to the { North West } area with modest time with the Father in Nottingham outside of holidays;
b. K relocate withboth
the parents to the { North West } area with modest time spent with the Father outside of holidays.
c. K relocate withboth
the parents to the { North West } area with substantial time spent with the Father outside of holidays.
d. K remains living in Nottingham with the Mother with modest time spent with the Father outside of holidays;
e. K remains living in Nottingham with his time spent equally withboth
the parents;
f. K remains living in Nottingham with the Mother with substantial time spent with the Father outside of holidays;
g. K lives with the Father in Nottingham with time spent with the Mother in the { North West } area.
b)
and (c) are not realistic
because
the Father does not intend to relocate away from Nottingham. Option (g) can
be
discounted
because
the Mother has no intention of relocating without K. When the options are identified in this way it
brings
the deficiencies in the FCA's analysis into stark focus.
Relocation to { North West area }, Spending Modest Time with the Father in Nottingham
by
this context:
a. The Mother has not persuaded me on the evidence upon which she relies that there are economic opportunities or advantages for her and the Husband in the { North West } area.
b. Nor, has she satisfied me that the network she describes (whatever it is precisely) is available to offer support of a particular kind (such as with childcare so that she can enter the workforce). I am satisfied that she would generally feel more comfortable and emotionally more at ease closer to the Husband's relatives.
c. I accept the Mother would likely find suitable housing if she relocates. I am unpersuaded that there is a marked difference in quality of housing for herbudget
and much will depend on the specific area she is within in the { North West } area and Nottingham.
be
relocated to the { North West } area then the Court should order K spend time with the Father from Friday evenings to Sunday afternoons on alternate weeks.
be
much happier if she is able to live with K in the North West. I accept, as her counsel put it, "Nottingham is not for her" any longer. She has fallen out with or lost connection with relatives and her last local connection, her own mother, is moving to { a town in Yorkshire }. If the Mother moves to the { North West area }, she will feel less isolated. I accept there is considerable advantage to K's welfare of his primary carer
being
happy,
being
comfortable in the place she wishes to live and feeling a community around her. In the North West, K would
be
closer to his step-father's relatives and his sibling's cousins. K would
be
placed in an appropriate nursery and school for his needs. However, I do not consider this plan is well considered and the Mother has an idealistic frame of mind. There is a material risk it will not
be
what she dreams (for example, the Husband's relatives may
be
less available than she hopes or the Husband may struggle to find work), which would disappoint her.
benefit
from having extended time with the Father during holidays. That would afford the opportunity for them to remain connected and give K understanding of his paternal identity. He could spend time with his paternal relatives. K would
be
able to spend time once per fortnight at weekends with his Father, which would help in maintaining their connection
between
opportunities for them to spend longer periods of time together.
be
prevented from having anything other than a limited direct relationship with the Father outside of holiday periods. K would not have the opportunity to develop the depth of relationship with the Father that he would have were he not to relocate.
between
{ North West area } and Nottingham, whether
by
train or
by
car in Friday and Sunday night traffic, would
be
extremely onerous for young K. It will
be
all the more challenging for K once he starts school. I accept K is likely to
be
exhausted on arriving at the Father's home on Friday nights and recovery from the journey will impinge on the quality of the time K spends with the Father at weekends. It is probable K will
be
tired in the mornings or need to sleep in, making Saturday morning activities a little more difficult. The impact of the journey means the Mother's proposal is not a replication the current arrangements with K living in a different city. Instead, K's experience of his time with the Father would
be
a qualitative less
beneficial
experience for K than if he were spending the same time with the Father
but
living in Nottingham
because
of the existence of the commute.
because
he is likely to
be
less settled after returning home late on Sundays than he otherwise would
be
on those weekends he does not have to travel. There is a real risk, which cannot
be
ignored, that the onerous return journey will negatively affect K's educational development. Moreover, the Father would
be
unable to have any meaningful engagement with K's school or his educational development. It is unlikely the Father will have the opportunity to develop relationships with school staff or attend significant school events. It is unlikely the Father would
be
able to support K with his homework. K spending ad hoc time with the Father, such as on his
birthday,
will
be
difficult if not impossible if he lives in { North West area }.
K Remains in Nottingham, Spending Modest Time with the Father
be
a Friday to Sunday alternate week pattern during term times with longer periods in holidays.
be
able to participate in her remote studies. The Husband will continue to
be
gainfully employed. There is no real prospect of the family
being
unable to make ends meet. I accept the Father's evidence that there are alternative suitable properties the Mother's family may live in with gardens within their
budget.
be
to K's great
benefit
that he will live in proximity to
both
parents. The Father would
be
able to
be
a part of K's school community
by
collecting him from school on Fridays. The Father would
be
able to conveniently attend significant school events, such as parents' evenings. The Father's understanding of K's developmental and educational needs is likely to
be
aided
by
the opportunity for such interactions. The absence of distance will mean the parents can each contribute to and make informed decisions when they exercise parental responsibility. For example, the parents will likely
both
understand local school options in Nottingham and
be
able to inspect local school, as well as
both
being
sufficiently local to attend important medical appointments. K's welfare is enhanced
by
the informed joint exercise of parental responsibility. To save repetition, I identify these considerations as the "benefits of K staying in Nottingham".
be
a heavy disappointment for the Mother. I accept she will feel a sense of isolation in the short-term in Nottingham with a risk that may persist. She will not have the Husband's family in proximity to her. She will not have any family locally whom she has a relationship with. The Mother would need to consider strategies she is yet to embrace to expand her social network. She did not strike me as a person for whom that would
be
easy,
but
she may find that is easier once K starts school. Forming an assessment of the impact the inability to relocate will have on the Mother's care of K is important. The Mother has not offered any evidence which suggests remaining would impact or compromise her mental health such that she would not provide appropriate care for K. The concession made
by
the Mother through her counsel that the Mother (should she have to remain in Nottingham) will "make it work" does not suggest the impact will come close to compromising the care given to K. To save repetition, I identify these considerations as the "disadvantages of K staying in Nottingham".
be
very limited in my judgment. Whilst K would
be
less tired when he arrives into the Father's care on Fridays than if he is to live in { North West area }, the opportunity for them to deepen their strong connection through the mundane,
but
qualitatively important interactions of daily life, would
be
limited. Moreover, the opportunity for the Father to engage with K's school directly would likely
be
limited to one occasion once per fortnight.
K Remains in Nottingham, Spending Equal Time with the Parents
benefits
of K staying in Nottingham are engaged. In addition, K would spend significantly more time with the Father. There would
be
greater opportunity for K to develop a deeper relationship with the Father
because
K would spend significant qualitatively valuable time with the Father, such as sitting and eating together talking about their days and the Father
being
able to regularly undertake a
bedtime
routine. Moreover, K spending equal time with the Father would give the Mother greater opportunity to travel to { North West area } to spend time with the Husband's family when K is not in her care, particularly if that can
be
co-ordinated around the Husband's remote work. K would have the greatest opportunity to spend time with his paternal family, which would strengthen his understanding of his paternal identity. This would
be
less significant were it not for it
being
apparent K is unlikely to have a meaningful relationship with his wider maternal family.
both
have important roles in promoting K's educational development. They would each
be
responsible for getting K to school, interacting with teachers and supporting K with homework.
be
engaged. Furthermore, K would experience a division of time that would
be
a significant change for him. I find he would likely struggle with such significant separation from the person to whom he is primarily attached. I am not confident the Father has the insight to understand this impact on K nor, presently (given that lack of insight), the parenting capability to support K with the challenge it will present him.
be
difficult, if not impossible, to spend that time outside of weekends.
K Remains in Nottingham, Spending Substantial Time with the Father
benefits
of K staying in Nottingham are engaged. K would spend regular and extended time with the Father, which would afford opportunities to deepen their relationship. The Father would play an important role in K's day-to-day life. K would likely recognise himself as having a home with the Father as well as the Mother, rather than the Father's home
being
place he occasionally visits outside of holidays. The substantial time would create opportunities for K to spend greater time with his paternal family with its previously identified advantages to K's welfare. K would spend more consistent time with his sibling than if his time were divided equally
between
the parents, which would minimise the harm done to their connection. The Mother would
be
able to travel to { North West area } to spend time with the Husband's family for more extended periods (at least until K and his sibling are
both
in school).
both
have important roles in promoting K's educational development. They would each
be
responsible for getting K to school, interacting with teachers and supporting K with homework.
be
change that K can manage
because
it will protect his relationship with his primary attachment. As K's time with the Father develops so too would the Father's understanding of his developmental needs.
be
engaged. K would spend less time with the Mother than he does presently. K may experience this change as unsettling. However, I consider that will
be
temporary. K would spend less time with his sibling and there is a risk they may
be
less close than if K spent only modest time with the Father.
Determination
between
(A) promoting a relationship
between
K and the Father that does justice to K and is in his
best
interests and (
B)
promoting the Mother's capacity to meet K's needs as his primary carer in a place she is happy. The solution I determine is in K
best
interests will have imperfections,
but
is the
best
of the options available.
best
interests. I accept a relocation would
benefit
the Mother emotionally and have advantages for K, however I consider the
benefits
to K of the relocation are significantly outweighed
by
the disadvantages and harms that he would have to
bear.
I accept that denying the Mother her desire to move will
be
a
bitter
blow
for her. However, I consider (and she accepted through counsel) it is one she will
be
able to manage. I do not consider it will compromise her parenting of K if she is required to remain in Nottingham.
by
relocating is far greater than what he stands to gain. He will lose the opportunity to have deep connections with
both
parents, who would each
be
able to
be
a significant part of his life. Instead, he would experience a much more limited relationship with the Father, which would
be
heavily impacted
by
the onerous journey he would have to
bear.
I am not persuaded that the time K will spend with the Father in holidays will provide an adequate platform for K to maintain a strong relationship with the Father. In particular, a relocation will deny the opportunity for K to connect with Father as an essential person in his daily routines
by
being
a part of K's school life and
by
experiencing the short qualitatively valuable experiences of
being
parented
by
the Father on a day-to-day
basis.
Whilst the Father does not have approval for flexible working at this time, I consider it likely that any nursery or school K is enrolled in will have wrap-around care for parents who are unable to attend drop-off and collection at usual hours.
be
far
better
for K to have a substantial relationship with
both
the parents. I reject the Father's suggestion that there should
be
an equal division of K's time
because
it would
be
challenging for K to spend such a significant period from his primary carer. It would also impose too great a restriction on the opportunity for K to develop his relationship with his sibling. The right
balance
is an arrangement which gradually
builds
K's time with his Father, so that the Father can play a significant role in K's life, whilst maintaining the stability of his primary attachment to the Mother. This will also afford K the opportunity to have a meaningful relationship with his wider paternal family, which would
be
more limited were he to relocate. Those relationships with the wider paternal family are of particular importance in circumstances where it sadly appears he will not have a meaningful relationship with his wider maternal family.
by
the conclusions of { Cafcass Employee 2 }, the first Family Court Adviser to report in this matter. In her section 7 report prepared prior to relocation
being
contemplated, { Cafcass Employee 2 } recommended that K spend time with the Father as frequently on alternate weekends in one month followed
by
three weekends in the following month (so about five weekends every two months). She also recommended K spend an additional one night with the Father in the week every week once he starts nursery. In my judgment that is a relatively high level of contact for a young child and reflects the significance of the relationship.
best
interests to reflect (A) that he is primarily in the Mother's care (noting that an unequal division of time is not a
bar
to the making of a shared lives with order); and (
B)
it reflects the Mother is K's primary emotional attachment.
be
conducted via school. To the extent it is possible and once K is enrolled in nursery, they can
be
conducted via nursery until then.
a. K live with the Mother;
b. K to spend time with the Father:
i. Commencing immediately: (A) in week 1, Fridays to Mondays; and (B)
in week 2, Thursdays to Fridays
ii. Commencing once K starts primary school: (A) in week 1, Thursdays to Mondays, and (B)
in week 2, Thursdays to Fridays.
c. K's time on Mother's Day and Father's Day will extend to the commencement of school on Monday, rather than conclude on Sunday afternoons.
d. The Mother's application to relocate K to the { North West } areabe and is dismissed.