• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Phone: 3465 9332

Logo
  • Home
  • Our Team
    • Courtney Barton – Legal Practice Director & Founder
    • George Finn – Executive Director
    • Ellie Prior – Solicitor
    • Tenayah Miano – Paralegal
  • Our Services
    • Divorce Property Settlement Lawyers
    • Family Law Spousal Maintenance
    • Superannuation Splitting & Advice Lawyers
    • Child Custody Lawyers
    • Child Support Lawyers
    • Child Relocation Family Lawyers
    • Child Abduction Family Lawyers
    • Fixed Fee Consent Orders Brisbane
    • Binding Financial Agreements
    • Fixed Fee Divorce Lawyers
    • Domestic Violence Lawyer – DVO Domestic Violence Order
    • Child Adoption Lawyer & Advice
    • Family Court Process
    • Family Mediation Services Brisbane
      • Why Mediate with the Brisbane Family mediator?
      • Contact the Brisbane Family Mediator
      • Barton Family Mediation Costs & Processes
        • Barton Family Mediation Fixed Fees
  • Fixed Fees
  • Common questions
  • Family Law Videos
  • Family Mediation
  • Contact Us
  • Success Stories

Prevention is better than Cure – Interim Relocation of Children Cases

March 8, 2018 By Barton Family Law

One of the most difficult interim applications the family courts are required to deal with are interim relocation of children cases, where one parent has unilaterally relocated the children without consent of the other parent.

In our previous blog we looked at how a court determines a relocation case, at a final hearing.

We will now take a look at how the court determines interim relocation of children cases, i.e. where a parent has relocated with the children unilaterally without consent of the other parent and seeks to maintain their living arrangements rather than be required to return and wait for a Trial (final hearing) for determination of the application.

Case Study – Interim Relocation of children

In the recent case of Sterry & Sterry [2017] FCCA 2255 the court considered an interim relocation of children case. The facts of that case are as follows:

The application before the court related to child X, aged 4 years old. The parties had been in a relationship for a number of years and since 2011, they had been living in New South Wales. The parties separated in May 2017 and the Mother moved to South Australia with child X, without the Father’s consent. The Mother had grown up in South Australia and sought to remain living there with child X, where she said she would have support from her family.

The Mother alleged that the father was physically, sexually and emotionally abusive towards her during the relationship and that relocating to South Australia was the only safe option for her and X. These allegations were denied by the Father.

The relationship had been deteriorating for some months to the point that the parties had exchanged texts and emails where the Mother sought to ‘get away’ and the father made it clear that X should stay.

The Father was sufficiently concerned that he instructed lawyers to write to the mother on 2 June 2017, confirming he did not consent to the mother relocating with child X from the New South Wales region. The Mother left with X and relocated to South Australia on 3 June 2017.

The court referred to the allegations of the Mother being very serious. There had been no charges laid and the court was unaware whether the police were still investigating the matter.

The court indicated that the father’s evidence which was put forward at the interim hearing may well cast doubt on the mother’s allegations e.g. showing he wasn’t present at the home at the time of the alleged assault.

However, the evidence of both parties was untested (the evidence is tested through cross-examination at a final hearing) and the court could not ignore the serious allegations of the mother.

The court balanced the competing factors in determining X’s best interests, including the serious allegations of the mother, the assessment that the father was not an appropriate primary caregiver for X at the time, the impact on X’s capacity to maintain a meaningful relationship with the Father and family in the short term if X was permitted to remain in South Australia and the emotional impact on the mother and therefore X, if the child was required to return to New South Wales.

Having regard to these factors, the court made interim orders which permitted the mother to remain living in South Australia with X.

How are interim relocation of children applications determined?

Interim relocation of children cases, where one parent has relocated without consent of the other parent, are the most difficult cases that the family courts are required to determine.

This is because interim relocation of children cases are generally marred with serious allegations of abuse and family violence, but the court cannot make findings of fact in relation to these allegations and fully assess the evidence that will enable the court to finally determine the child’s best interests, until a Final Hearing.

The courts are necessarily cautious about permitting an interim relocation of children for this reason.

In the leading interim relocation of children case, Morgan & Miles, it was held that arrangements which alter the child’s present stability should not be determined at an abridged interim hearing, but at a Final hearing.  In this case the Court ordered the Mother to return the child to the previous location, until the issue of the proposed relocation could be considered at a Final Hearing.

Generally speaking, a party should not be permitted to ‘move the goal posts’ and relocate with a child at an interim hearing and until all of the evidence can be tested as to its truth at a Final Hearing/Trial.

On the other side of the coin, in circumstances where the court cannot determine the truth or otherwise of allegations made by a party at an interim hearing and until a Final Hearing, all allegations, properly particularised, must be taken seriously by the court.

The case study of Sterry demonstrates that the courts genuinely struggle to make orders on an interim basis which provide for a child to be returned to their former location when a parent relocates with a child without consent of the other parent, in circumstances where there are serious allegations of abuse and family violence.

In these cases, the court will have regard to the impact of a disruption to the child’s new living arrangements and where there are serious allegations made against the party seeking the return of the child, this may be sufficient to deny an interim application by a parent seeking the return of the children to their former living arrangements.

In the case of Sterry, the Mother’s serious allegations of abuse, in conjunction with the mother’s role as primary carer for X during the relationship, and the likely impact on her if the father’s application for X to return was successful, outweighed competing factors such as the disruption to the relationship between X and the Father and were sufficient for the court to adopt a conservative approach and permit the mother to remain living with X in South Australia until a final hearing.

In contrast, in the case of Jacobsen & Mohr [2017] FCCA 642, the court was faced with similar circumstances and took the opposite approach. In that case, the Mother had unilaterally relocated from Adelaide to Melbourne with her 11 month old child and made contemporaneous reports to the police and her counsellor of serious allegations against the father of abuse and family violence. The court was faced again with the difficult task, in similar circumstances to the case of Sterry, of weighing up the child’s right to a safe environment free from risk of potential family violence, as opposed to the potential benefit of the child having a meaningful relationship with both of his parents. It was held by the court in Jacobsen & Mohr that whilst the allegations should be taken seriously, the child would not be at any greater risk of exposure to family violence if he was living in Adelaide. The Mother was therefore ordered to return to Adelaide with the child and orders were made for the Father to spend time with the child supervised at a contact centre.

These cases demonstrate the difficult task that is faced by the courts when dealing with interim relocation of children matters. Similar facts can produce entirely different results.

Get prompt legal advice

The Case study of Sterry exemplifies why it is very important that you seek prompt legal advice if you are a party to an interim relocation of children case, whether you are the parent seeking to relocate or the parent opposing the relocation.

If you are the parent opposing the relocation, and you get wind your ex partner intends to relocate the children without your consent, you should immediately instruct an expert child custody lawyer and seek urgent orders from the court to prevent the other party from relocating with the children, as the prospects of success of such an interim application are much higher than an application requiring the return of the parent who unilaterally relocated the children without your consent.

Contact us today to book a reduced rate confidential initial consultation with one of our family law experts to receive advice about your specific circumstances. We will guide you through the process and prepare a strategic plan of action that maximises the prospects of success of your application to relocate/prevent relocation of your children.

 

interim relocation of children case - child on plane relocating

 

 

Filed Under: News

Barton Family Law

Primary Sidebar

Online Enquiry

I would like to book a reduced rate initial consultation with you

Footer

Areas of Practice

  • Child Custody Lawyers
  • Divorce Property Settlement Lawyers
  • Fixed Fee Divorce Lawyers
  • Domestic Violence Lawyer – DVO Domestic Violence Order
  • Superannuation Splitting & Advice Lawyers
  • Fixed Fee Consent Orders Brisbane
  • Mediation Representation
  • Child Relocation Family Lawyers
  • Child Abduction Family Lawyers
  • Child Support Lawyers
  • Family Law Spousal Maintenance
  • Child Adoption Lawyer & Advice
  • Family Court Process
  • Family Mediation Services Brisbane
  • Binding Financial Agreements

Common Questions & Concerns

  • How to spend more time with your children
  • What is substantial and significant time 
  • Parental Alienation in Family Court Disputes – Pt 1
  • Parental Alienation in Family Court Disputes – Pt 2 
  • Top 10 things people do wrong in child custody matters
  • What age can a child decide where they live?
  • Admissibility of recordings in family law cases 
  • Am I a parent?
  • I’m Not a parent. Can I apply for a parenting order? 
  • I want sole custody
  • Can I go to court without doing mediation first?
  • Can parenting orders be changed? 
  • Relocation of Children
  • Interim relocation of children cases
  • Unilateral relocation of children
  • International travel with children after separation
  • My ex is breaching a parenting order. What do I do? 
  • When is supervised time ordered?
  • Is a child’s changed views enough to change a parenting order? 
  • Interim parenting orders – why can’t the judge make the orders I want? 
  • When can you change your child’s surname?
  • What is substantial & significant time?
  • Domestic violence order applications – boosting prospects of success
  • What to do and what not to do when you separate
  • Why you should formalise your property settlement;
  • Is Domestic violence relevant in a property settlement?
  • 6 secrets revealed to protect your assets 
  • 10 tips to protect your assets
  • 6 things you must know before hiring a family lawyer
  • Your Duty of Disclosure 
  • Spousal Maintenance – supporting your ex partner after separation 
  • Initial contribution of assets in a long relationship 
  • What is the just and equitable requirement?
  • Chancellor & Mccoy – no order after 27 yr relationship
  • Am I in a de facto relationship?
  • My ex is selling assets. What can I do?
  • Property acquired after separation – how is it treated? 
  • When are future inheritances they taken into account?
  • Failure to disclose an asset can derail consent orders 
  • Consequences of Defaulting on property orders 
  • Varying property orders 
  • Who stays in the home after separation?
  • Can the court order someone to leave the house – ouster orders 
  • Money lent from parents – gift or loan?
  • The impact of centrelink fraud on a property settlement 
  • CGT rollover relief for transfers of property pursuant to family court orders 
  • Costs orders 
  • Divorce – what you need to know
  • Going back to work after divorce 
  • Step-Parent awarded interim custody over parent 

If you are a law student, graduate or early career lawyer, reach out to Courtney who is also a law Coach. Courtney’s law coaching services are invaluable to young lawyers. Courtney’s one on one law coaching services will help you to achieve massive success in your legal career.  Check out Courtney’s website for the Thriving Young Lawyer to learn more about Courtney’s law coaching services.

Individual liability limited by a scheme approved under professional standards legislation.

Contact Us

Head office

  • Address: 4/996 Anzac Avenue, Petrie QLD 4501
  • Parking: Underground parking available at the back of the building via O’Loan Street
  • Phone: 3465 9332
  • Email: george.finn@bartonfamilylaw.com.au
  • Website: Petrie Family Lawyers

Northside – Chermside Office

  • Address: 822 Gympie Road, Chermside QLD 4032
  • Phone: 3465 9332
  • Email: george.finn@bartonfamilylaw.com.au
  • Website: Chermside Family Lawyers

Aspley Office

  • Address: Aspley Hypermarket, 59 Albany Creek Road, Aspley QLD 4034
  • Phone: 3465 9332
  • Email: tenayah.miano@bartonfamilylaw.com.au
  • Website: Aspley Family Lawyers

Toowong Office

  • Address: Toowong Tower Level 5, Toowong Tower, 9 Sherwood Road, Toowong, QLD 4066
  • Phone: 3465 9332
  • Email: tenayah.miano@bartonfamilylaw.com.au
  • Website: Toowong Family Lawyers

Copyright © 2020 · Privacy Policy
Created and hosted by LEAP · Log in