Ciren Scene Magazine - Supporting Local Businesses
sary information in respect of the child’s schooling, suitable housing arrangements, support network etc and to show that the plans are well thought out with good reasons given for the proposed relocation.
The parent opposing relocation will also need to set out in detail the reasons for refusing their permis- sion, the Court will hear evidence and decide in ac- cordance with the specific facts of the case whether the proposed relocation is in the child’s best inter- est. In the case of Re F (A Child) (International Relo- cation Cases) [2015], the Court of Appeal provided a comprehensive overview of the case law.
Each proposal needs to be evaluated as to its own merits and by reference to what the child has to say and then compared side by side with that proposed by the other party. A welfare analysis of each pro- posal will be necessary. The welfare of the child is paramount. International cases, where the possibil- ity of a fundamental interference with the relation- ship between one parent and a child is envisaged, require that the parents’ plans be scrutinised and evaluated by reference to the proportionality of the same when weighed against the parties’ Article 8 Human Rights (ie the Right to ‘Family Life’).
What happens if a parent unilaterally makes plans to relocate abroad with their child without discussing this with, or getting the consent of the other parent?
Any removal of a child from England and Wales is child abduction unless permission has been given by the Court or by virtue of the written consent of the other parent (or any other individual who has paren- tal responsibility for the child).
Before the UK left the EU, parental child abduction was dealt with under the Brussels II A Regulation which regulates the rules of jurisdiction for parental responsibility, child protection and child abduction
The Churn Project Celebrating 20 years supporting our community 14-16 The Waterloo, Cirencester GL7 2PY 01285 380038 -
info@thechurn.org.uk
www.churnproject.org.uk
within the EU. The UK now solely relies on the 1980 and 1996 Hague Conventions.
It is always best to take the necessary preventative steps in order to stop a potential removal which could include for example, obtaining a Prohibited Steps Order from the Court. This is particularly the case now with some suggesting that child abduction cases will not be dealt with as swiftly as required under Brussels II A and some concerns that custody and child abduction disputes will become more com- plex and costly. It remains to be seen whether the UK will implement the same provisions as Brussels II A into domestic law.
If there are genuine concerns about potential child abduction, it is important to ensure that you act quickly.
alerts will be required.
If there is an immediate risk, then Port If there is sufficient time
to secure an ex-parte application at Court (for an Order prohibiting the removal of a child from a ju- risdiction) then this should be actioned as quickly as possible.
For advice about Family Law please contact Steven Barratt or Heather Weavill
Alison Fielden & Co Solicitors, 01285 653261,
www.alisonfielden.co.uk
The Gatehouse, Dollar Street, GL7 2AN
Ciren Scene Magazine 01285 659673 / 07875 071555
info@cirenscene.com
31
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56
