Thrings has successfully defended a working mother’s plan to relocate with her child in pursuit of career progression, after an initial decision was appealed in the High Court.
The case upheld the decision of the lower court to allow a young professional to move across England with her child to take a role in her chosen specialism. Having sought permission of the Family Court to do so back in April 2024, she was successful at the hearing, with Thrings Family Partner Kate Barber and instructed counsel from Pump Court Chambers acting on her behalf.
The decision was appealed by the father and elevated to the High Court, arguing against the original Judge’s findings on a number of procedural and legal grounds, including that the Judge wrongly suggested that the question of relocating the child was a “binary” decision.
This was countered by an argument that the decision made by the judge was holistic and ultimately in the best interests of the child, given that the mother was unlikely to find the same role locally. This would mean the child would inevitably face relocating at some point in the future anyway. The court found at first instance that the disruption to the child in relocating now was better to happen before starting school than later once she had settled.
It was particularly important as the mother struggled to be shortlisted for roles in this type of specialism as she was at a disadvantage following an extended period of maternity leave. Securing this role would enable permanence and long-term stability for mother and child.
It was further argued that, due to the distance between the southern city where the child was living and the northern city where the role was based, that regular commuting would not be an option, nor was it financially possible to maintain two homes.
In a judgment published today, Ms Justice Henke dismissed the appeal and found that, contrary to the appellant’s arguments, the original decision was “neither procedurally irregular nor out with the generous ambit of the learned Recorder’s discretion”.
Ms Justice Henke found the original decision to be “finely balanced” and that it was the result of a “global, holistic evaluation of the best interests of the child” with the use of the term “binary”, whilst unfortunate in its interpretation by the appellant, was justified in the decision that had to be made. Relocation is a binary decision, but the balancing exercise must be holistic.
Following the publication of the decision, Kate Barber said: “We are delighted on behalf of our client to have achieved this decision. This is a real success for working mothers and their right to be able to pursue their chosen careers whilst remaining a central part of their child’s life.
“Whilst this case reinforces the approach taken by the Family Courts to prioritise the welfare of children involved and to carry out a holistic balancing exercise when coming to a decision, it is also a reminder for appellants not to fixate on the use of language when analysing a judgement.”
Thrings Family lawyers are experienced in all areas of the law that are close to home. Whether it is marriages and pre-nuptial agreements, or divorces and separations, they will put your best interests first, taking the time to get to know you so that you are supported with sound advice tailored to your needs. To find out more, get in contact.
