Child relocation, soft law, and the quest for uniformity at the European court of human rights – part two
License
Access Rights
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
1895-1279
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
Prawa prywatnego, 2021, Vol. 16, No. 1, OnlineOnly
Cite
CERAN, Olga Magdalena, Child relocation, soft law, and the quest for uniformity at the European court of human rights – part two, Prawa prywatnego, 2021, Vol. 16, No. 1, OnlineOnly - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/74360
Abstract
In J.A.T & J.B.T v. UK, a complaint was made by a non-relocating father on behalf of himself and his son. After the parents divorced, a fully-shared care arrangement was put in place for the child. In the meantime, the mother applied to court for permission to relocate to South Africa with the child. The motivation behind the move was disputed: the father claimed that the plan was vague and due to the mother’s new relationship, and the mother asserted the lack of employment prospects and support network in the UK as the main reasons for the relocation. The social worker appointed by the national court drew attention to the uncertainty around the mother’s future living arrangements and to the close relationship between the father and the child, but also to solid support and sufficient resilience of the boy to be able to face some negative consequences of the move. Ultimately, the social worker recommended that the child should not relocate abroad unless there is a cogent reason to do so, and the evaluation thereof was left to the national court.