1. In the English court of first instance, who was the judge? (1 mark)

2. What were the parties seeking from the court at first instance (2 marks)
3. What was the outcome at first instance? (2 marks)
4. Who were the Court of Appeal judges and when did they hear the appeal? (2 marks)

5. According to Lord Justice Thorpe, what two propositions have governed relocation cases over the past 3 decades? (2 marks)
6. What important authority relied on by the court of first instance was challenged by the appellant? (1 mark)

7. What issues did the appellant raise in respect of the European Convention on Human Rights? Did the Court of Appeal agree and what reported European cases were cited in support? (6 marks)
8. What does Lord Justice Thorpe believe is the most crucial assessment and finding for a judge in a relocation case and why? (1 mark)
9. What guidelines for relocation cases did Lord Justice Thorpe set out?

(2 marks)

10. Please identify from the below, which are the material facts in Payne v Payne and which are not? (4 marks)
i) The claimant worked in Kuala Lumpar for 6 months during the parties’ marriage.
ii) The respondent had an intense dislike of life in London.
iii) An application can be made under the Hague Convention in relation to any child wrongfully removed from the country in which they are habitually resident.
iv) The claimant’s contact with the child went exceptionally well.

11. Which of the following is/are the ratio decidendi of the case? If you think a statement is part of the ratio decidendi explain why. If you think a statement is not part of the ratio decidendi explain why. (6 marks)
a) The mother’s family support network was in Auckland, New Zealand.
b) The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration.
c) The opportunity for continuing contact between the child and the parent left behind may be very significant.

12. What was the decision in the Court of Appeal? (1 marks)

13. Omar and Roccio divorced 1 year ago, shortly after the birth of their third child and Roccio was granted a residence order in respect of the children. When the parties divorced they had to move out of the family home due to financial pressures. Roccio moved to a rented two bedroom flat with the parties’ three children (aged 1, 3 and 16) in a less expensive area of the city and Omar moved back in with his parents who live at least an hour away by car. Although the parties have an acrimonious relationship, Omar sees the children every other weekend and one evening during the week. Omar has gathered from their oldest child that Roccio is struggling to cope and has been feeling lonely and depressed for some months.
Omar has recently received notification from the court that Roccio has applied under the Children Act 1989 for an order to relocate with their three children back to Valencia, Spain where she is from. She argues that she has a strong support network there with parents, siblings and cousins nearby. She says that she also has better prospects for work and has been offered a job in the family business there. Omar is distraught by this news and is planning to oppose her application. He says he is especially concerned about the impact of any move on his relationship with the two youngest children.

Using only the principles of law developed from Payne v Payne, advise Omar. (20 marks)

For custom-written answers, place your order now!

What We Offer
• On-time delivery guarantee
• PhD-level professionals
• Automatic plagiarism check
• 100% Privacy and Confidentiality
• High Quality custom-written papers