Read the full judgment text of FCMC 9824/2015 on BabelCite. This Family Court judgment was delivered on 23 September 2022 before Her Honour Judge Sharon D. Melloy.
Relocation – Best interests of child – Pandemic travel restrictions – Single Joint Expert – Social Welfare Report – Costs – Matrimonial Causes – Application by mother to permanently remove child N from Hong Kong to Sydney, Australia – Whether relocation is in child's best interests – Court finds application premature due to child's emotional vulnerability, close relationship with father and paternal cousins, and ongoing travel restrictions – Application dismissed – No order as to costs. The Petitioner mother applied for leave to permanently remove the only child of the family, N, from Hong Kong to Sydney, Australia. The parties divorced in 2018 with joint custody and care and control to the mother, with detailed access arrangements for the father. The father opposes the relocation, citing the child's emotional vulnerability, anxiety, and close relationship with him and his family, as well as pandemic travel restrictions. The mother argues the move is necessary for the child's education and to be near her aging father. The court applied the guidelines from H v W [2021] HKCA 733. The Social Welfare Report supported relocation but the Single Joint Expert report did not. The court found the application premature given the child's anxiety and the travel restrictions. The court dismissed the summons. No order as to costs was made. The court considered the mother's genuine and realistic proposal, the father's genuine opposition, and the impact on the applicant. The court found the mother's application was genuine but the timing was premature due to the pandemic. The court found the father's opposition was genuine. The court found the impact on the mother would be devastating but she could work from Hong Kong. The court found the impact on the father would be severe. The court found the child's best interests paramount. The court found the child's emotional vulnerability and close relationship with the father and cousins outweighed the benefits of relocation. The court found the travel restrictions made access difficult. The court dismissed the summons. No order as to costs was made.
Legal issues: Relocation application · Costs and Orders
Outcome: Mother’s summons dated the 5 October 2020 to relocate to Sydney, Australia shall be dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases · Cites 1 case