FATHER SEEKS COURT ORDER TO PREVENT THE MOTHER FROM RELOCATING THEIR CHLD
Galligan & Seevers [2020] FCCA 2914 (5 November 2020)
This case involves the applicant-father arguing that their child should not be relocated to Victoria as sought by the mother.
Facts:
The applicant-father argues that equal time for X between the parents and hence X not being permitted to relocate to Victoria will assist in X developing a quality relationship with each of his parents. The implication of the father's argument is that X's relationship with his father is not yet fully developed and that at such a young age the relationship, as it currently exists, would be further jeopardised by the relocation.
The mother seeks an order inter alia that she be permitted to relocate with X to Town C which is a town on the Region D in Victoria and approximately 30 km from City E. The mother says that she is and has been X's primary parent. She says that she has a long held desire to live in the Town C area where she has the support of her aunt Ms O with whom she is very close and with whom she has previously lived for approximately nine years in Town P, Tasmania. The mother says that the wish to move to Town C is one shared by other members of her family including her children and her parents who would also contemplate the move.
Issue: Should the court permit the mother to relocate X?
Law:
Analysis:
The mother has historically been X's primary parent. She is quite obviously his first source of support and primary attachment. Both parties candidly concede that they have very diverse parenting styles and philosophies broadly but specifically manifested in areas of discipline. They present as different role models. X is still a young child and hence vulnerable and easily influenced. Their mutual communication and trust levels are not high. They are of different personality types. In all of those circumstances, the court is not satisfied that the father's application for an equal time arrangement between the parents would be in X's best interest. The court prefers that those interests are served by a continuation of the status quo. This permits X to have the benefit of a stable home base while still having a high degree of frequency of direct contact with his father. This will in turn allow the father to fully develop his parenting skills and insight and hence his relationship with X. It will allow the father to engage in X's education and extracurricular activities. The court will also provide for block periods for X with the father during school holidays.
Conclusion: Court orders that X live with the mother and spend time with the father. Furthermore, each of the parents be and are hereby restrained from relocating X’s principal place of residence from the Region B of Tasmania without Court order or express written consent of the other parent.