In re A (permission to remove child from jurisdiction: human rights): CA 2000

The mother had been given leave by the Recorder to remove a ten month old girl permanently from the jurisdiction to the United States in circumstances where the mother`s job prospects were better in New York than in England. The father, (in person) raised the question of a breach of his right under Article 8(1). The Court considered the effect of Article 8 but saw no reason to interfere with the established line of authority followed by the judge and which bound the Court.
Held: Leave was refused. Buxton LJ doubted whether the difficult balancing exercise performed by the judge came within the purview of the Convention at all.


Ward and Buxton LJJ


[2000] 2 FLR 225


European Convention on Human Rights 8, Human Rights Act 1998, Children Act 1989


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPayne v Payne; P v P CA 13-Feb-2001
No presumption for Mother on Relocation
The mother applied for leave to return to New Zealand taking with the parties’ daughter aged four. The father opposed the move, saying that allowing the move would infringe his and the child’s right to family life. He had been refused residence.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.417807