FATHER REFUSES HIS CHILD TO RELOCATE AND ACCEPT SCHOLARSHIP
Bedwell & Gaisford [2020] FCCA 3472 (8 December 2020)
This is an interim application concerning a child who is 11 years old where there is a dispute on whether the child should be permitted to relocate interstate to take up a school scholarship. The father opposes the child relocating at the current time even if the child has told the family consultant that she wishes to relocate.
Facts:
The child of the parties, Y, who is 11 years old has been offered a scholarship by the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation. The scholarship covers all boarding and tuition at the school and is worth $45,000 a year. The mother, in her affidavit, says that if there are any extra expenses, she will be in a position to cover those.
She is currently in year 6 at F School and if she remained in Darwin she would go to a middle school next year. If she goes to South Australia she will go to senior school, so she will change school at the end of this year. Y sees boarding school as opening up opportunities for education and experience that she would not necessarily obtain in Darwin.
The father says that Y should not go. He says in substance that she is too young. He says that he would not have any objection if she went in years 10-12 and he annexes a letter from the school which suggests that a scholarship may be open in later years. he blames the mother essentially for putting this idea into Y’s head and he says that he was not properly consulted about it.
Issue: Should the child be permitted to relocate and attend school in Adelaide?
Held:
While the court acknowledges that Y is very relatively young – she will not turn 12 until next year – the court is of the view that she is a relatively mature child who is focused on going to boarding school. She should be given the chance to do that. The court does not have any real doubt about her welfare at that school or in Adelaide. The court is sure that she will remain in touch with her parents.
The court is of the view that Y’s wishes should be given very significant weight and given effect and it is not satisfied that the arguments raised by the father are particularly persuasive, so the court proposes to make the order sought by the mother.
Conclusion: Court orders that child Y born in 2009 be permitted to attend B School in Adelaide in 2021.