Relocation And Contact Orders Flashcards
S2(3) 1995 Act
No person shall be able to take a child habitually resident in Scotland from or to retain a child outwith the UK without consent of a person described in Sub section (6)
What if consent under S2(3) isn’t possible?
The parent would need to apply for a residence order or a specific issue order under S11(2)
What if section 2(3) is ignored
Apply for an interdict or apply for a specific issue offer under S11(2)
M v M 2000
Us citizen was a mother of 3 sight residence and specific issue orders to remove children and take them to the US. She had a job lined up in the family business however the father said that the plans were ill thought. Order was granted as the court applied the balancing principle and said it would be better to make an action than to not
M v M 2008
Mother sought specific issue order to remove child to Spain however no school or job set up just a house, he had close fam in Scotland and good relationship with father. Court order refused
M v M 2016
Relocation to move 2 children to England appealed by the father. This case shows that you have to prove :
- Relocation would be in the best interests of the child
- From the child’s perspective it would be better for an order to be made than none at all
Applying the welfare principle to contact orders
Contact orders can be made under S11(2)(d) and regulate contact- these can be applied for by someone with PRRs and someone without them as long as it’s in he child’s best interest
White v White
Mr and Mrs divorces and a residence order was granted to the mothe. 18 months later father wanted contact with youngest child. Ordionally it was argued he would have to prove that this was in the child’s best interest. The court however overturned this saying there was no proof necessary they just had to be satisfied that it was best for the child.
K v k
Contact orders should be based on the individual circumstances of the case. She was on probation and so therefore only got 1 hour a week with kids
