Barry McAlinden acted for the mother, Dr M (a medical consultant) in her successful application for permission to move with her 2 sons (aged 4 and 9) to the UAE – a non-Hague convention state. The father, Mr O, opposed the application.
This is the 1st case to consider the interplay of Practice Direction 12J and relocation to a non-Hague convention country.
(This judgment was published after the father’s unsuccessful appeal to the Court of Appeal, which is reported at [2025] EWCA Civ 888).
Background to the proceedings
The court had made previous findings of serious domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour by the father, which the children had witnessed in part.
These proceedings considered:
- whether to grant the mother permission to relocate to the UAE (a non-Hague Convention country)
- her allegations of ongoing controlling behaviour against her via concurrent criminal proceedings in another jurisdiction brought by the father’s family and supported by him, as well as
- physical chastisement of the 2 children.
Legal framework
The judge considered the paramountcy principle set out in s.1 Children Act 1989 taking into account the welfare checklist.
He considered case law on cross applications for child arrangements orders involving relocation to another jurisdiction including V v M and another [2020] EWHC 488 (Fam).
Given the significant findings of domestic abuse, he also applied Practice Direction 12J and its impact on contact and relocation.
He heard expert evidence about the law and practice in the United Arab Emirates which highlighted difficulties of enforcing an English court order because the parents never married.
Judgment
The court granted Barry’s client permission to relocate to the UAE, even though there would be no effective mechanism to deal with children law matters there (despite recent modernisation and judicial developments).
Read the judgment in full in Re O (Domestic Abuse: International Relocation) [2025] EWFC 529