Can I Move Away with my Children After Separation?

Article Summary

• Moving within England and Wales does not automatically require court permission, however, you may need the other parents’ written consent (and any other party with parental responsibility) depending on the distance. If the move would disrupt an existing Child Arrangements Order or require a school change, you need the other parent’s written consent (and any other party with parental responsibility) or a court order first.
• It is crucial to consider how a move with children separation can affect existing arrangements and relationships.
• Taking a child abroad permanently without the written consent of everyone with parental responsibility, or without a court order, is a criminal offence under the Child Abduction Act 1984, carrying a sentence of up to seven years’ imprisonment.
• In any relocation application, the child’s welfare is the court’s paramount consideration under section 1(1) of the Children Act 1989. There is no presumption in favour of either parent.
• The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction allows a parent to apply for the return of a child wrongfully removed to a signatory country. Where the destination country has not signed the Convention, return of the child becomes significantly harder.
• Courts take a dim view of parents who relocate without consent and then seek retrospective approval. Early legal advice, before any move is made, is strongly advisable.

Whether you can move away with your children after separation turns on where you want to go and what child arrangements are currently in place between you and the other parent. A move from Birmingham to Bristol raises different legal questions than a move from Birmingham to Brisbane, and the consequences of getting either wrong can be serious for everyone and negatively impact your child’s wellbeing. Therefore, it is crucial to seek legal advice from an experienced Family Law Solicitor before you make any decisions.

You may have legitimate reasons for moving. For example, you want to move closer to your family and friends elsewhere in the country, take up new employment, or simply rebuild your life in a different place. The law in England and Wales does not prevent a parent from moving; however, it requires, in certain circumstances, that the move be agreed to or authorised before it occurs.

Purcell Solicitors’ family team regularly advises on both domestic and international cases. Below is a brief guide to the law around moving away with your children after you separate or divorce.

The law around relocating with your children after separation or divorce

The starting point is section 1(1) of the Children Act 1989, which provides that the welfare of the child is the court’s paramount consideration whenever a question arises about a child’s upbringing. That principle applies to every relocation dispute, however far or however local the proposed move may be.

Where a Child Arrangements Order specifying with whom the child lives is already in force, section 13 of the Children Act 1989 provides that no person may remove the child from the United Kingdom without the written consent of everyone with parental responsibility, or the court’s permission. A narrow exception exists: the parent with whom the child lives (ie. has a ‘lives with order’) under the order may take the child abroad for up to one month without consent, provided the trip does not breach any other term of the order.

For international moves, the Child Abduction Act 1984, section 1 provides that a person connected with a child under 16 commits an offence by taking or sending that child out of the United Kingdom without the appropriate consent. The  sentence is up to seven years’ imprisonment. Prosecutions do occur, and the offence can be committed even where the parent acting believes the move is in the child’s interests.

Moving Within England and Wales

A local move that leaves the existing school run and contact pattern/living arrangement with the other parent intact and no disruption is unlikely to require any formal process. A move from Cardiff to Newcastle is a different matter: contact arrangements would change substantially, and the other parent may well object. In those circumstances, the moving parent should seek the other parent’s written consent before proceeding. If consent is refused, the correct course is to apply to the Family Court for a Specific Issue Order under section 8 of the Children Act 1989. The parent opposing the move can apply for a Prohibited Steps Order to prevent relocation pending a final hearing.

There is also a practical point that catches some parents off guard. Changing a child’s school requires the consent of all those with parental responsibility. A parent who relocates unilaterally and attempts to enrol their child in a new school without the other parent’s agreement is likely to find the admission process becomes the flashpoint for formal proceedings.

The court’s approach to domestic relocation was confirmed in Re F (Children) [2010] EWCA Civ 1428, where Lord Justice Wilson held that section 1(1) welfare paramountcy governs internal relocation cases in exactly the same way as international ones, with no starting presumption in favour of either parent. K v K (Relocation: Shared Care Arrangement) [2011] EWCA Civ 793 put the matter even more plainly. Lord Justice Thorpe described the child’s welfare as “the only authentic principle” running through the entire line of relocation authorities, adding that there is no presumption that a primary carer’s reasonable relocation plans will be approved unless there is a compelling reason to the contrary. Both cases remain the foundation for deciding domestic relocation applications. The court continues to examine relocation proposals with close attention to evidence.  In the recent case of Re K (Internal Relocation) [2025] EWFC 285 (B) a mother made an application for permission to move a modest distance with her 3 year old son to north west England from Nottingham and the application was refused with the Judge describing the mother’s expectations as “idealistic”.

Moving Abroad with your Child

International relocation carries greater legal complexity and higher stakes. A parent who removes a child from the UK without permission commits a criminal offence, faces urgent return proceedings, and risks long-term damage to their relationship with both the child and the courts.

Before any application is made, the moving parent must seek the written agreement of every other person with parental responsibility. If agreement is reached, it should be reflected in a Consent Order, so that the revised arrangements for the other parent’s time with the children are enforceable if problems arise later. If agreement cannot be reached, an application for a Specific Issue Order or leave to remove under section 13 of the Children Act 1989 is the only lawful route forward.

The leading authority on international relocation is Re F (A Child) (International Relocation Cases) [2015] EWCA Civ 882. The Court of Appeal held that excessive reliance on the earlier checklist in Payne v Payne [2001] EWCA Civ 166 constitutes an error of law. Both parents’ proposals must be analysed side by side through a holistic welfare assessment, and the fact that a relocation plan is genuine and well-considered does not mean it will be approved. The father’s appeal was allowed, and the matter remitted for a full rehearing on that basis.

Courts considering an international relocation application look closely at: the child’s current and proposed schooling; housing in the destination country; the applying parent’s employment and finances; the support network available to the child after the move; a funded and realistic contact plan for the other parent, including who pays for travel; and the impact on the child’s existing relationships. A vague proposal will not do. Courts that refuse permission frequently point to a lack of concrete planning as the deciding factor.  In the recent case of Re O (Domestic Abuse: International Relocation) [2025] EWCA Civ 888 the mother sought to relocate to the UAE with her two children.  There had been serious findings of domestic abuse and the Court accepted that remaining in England exposed the mother and children to ongoing emotional harm and instability.  The Court granted permission for the mother and two children to relocate.  Whilst the father appealed this decision, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court judge’s decision and dismissed the father’s appeal so mother and the children were able to relocate to a non-Hague Convention county as mother had provided significant evidence and researched thoroughly providing a detailed plan for her and the children.

Recent case law reaffirms that relocation cases, whether internal or external (international), demand careful evidence which is often complex and can ultimately make the difference in the final decision which can have a significant impact on a child’s future.

The Hague Convention and Wrongful Removal

The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction operates on the principle that disputes about where a child should live ought to be resolved by the courts of the country where the child was habitually resident before the removal, not by the courts of the country to which they have been taken. Where a child has already been removed without consent, the Convention provides a summary procedure for securing their return.

A parent whose child has been wrongfully removed to a Convention signatory state can apply to the Central Authority in England, the International Child Abduction and Contact Unit for return proceedings. Signatory states are required to act within six weeks. The defences available to the removing parent are deliberately narrow: they include grave risk of physical or psychological harm to the child under Article 13(b), the child’s own objections where they have reached sufficient age and maturity, and, if proceedings are not started within a year, evidence of settled life in the new country. Courts apply all three defences restrictively.

Where the destination is a country that has not signed the Convention, or one whose accession the UK has not formally accepted, matters can become much more complicated. Countries including Afghanistan, the UAE, Egypt, and India are examples of where. the parent left behind has no automatic right to a summary return hearing. They must pursue proceedings under the foreign country’s own domestic law, frequently at considerable expense and with no guarantee of a result. Purcell Solicitors’  family team can advise on urgent steps to take if a removal to a non-Hague country is feared.

A parent concerned about unlawful removal has several immediate options: applying for a Prohibited Steps Order, seeking a port alert from the police (which remains active for 28 days and creates time to obtain a court order), or applying to His Majesty’s Passport Office to prevent a new British passport being issued to the child without their consent. All of these can be applied for without giving the other parent advance notice, where urgency requires it.

Practical Steps for Parents

Whether you want to move or fear being the parent left behind, in our experience, the courts respond better to parents who have approached the situation thoughtfully and communicated in good faith. Parents who move first and seek approval afterwards face an uphill battle. The cases show it repeatedly.

For parents planning to relocate, the following steps reflect what courts expect and what good legal practice requires:

• Raise the proposal with the other parent as early as possible, in writing, and give them a reasonable opportunity to respond. Silence does not constitute consent.
• Explore non-court dispute resolution before issuing proceedings. Mediation is ordinarily required before a court application can be made, and a skilled mediator can help both parents centre the discussion on the child rather than on their own positions.
• If the proposed move is international, prepare a detailed relocation plan covering schooling, accommodation, the financial basis for the move, your support network in the destination country, and a concrete proposal for the other parent’s contact with the child, specifying who will meet the cost of travel.
• Do not book flights, give notice on a tenancy, or tell the children about the move until you have written consent or a court order. Acting prematurely creates pressure, accelerates conflict, and courts treat it as evidence of presuming permission will be granted and is not favoured by the Courts and could impact on the decision they ultimately make.
• If consent is withheld and you believe the move is in the child’s best interests, apply to the court for a Specific Issue Order. Do not go without one.
• If you are the parent opposing a move, apply for a Prohibited Steps Order without delay. Delay affects the court’s view of your position and, in international cases, can complicate or prevent the child’s return.

Relocation cases are among the most fact-sensitive in family law. The outcome depends on the child’s age, their relationship with each parent, the realism of the contact proposals after any move, and the court’s assessment of each parent’s motivation. A case that looks straightforward at the outset can quickly become contested. Specialist legal advice, obtained before any step is taken, makes a material difference and protects the welfare of any children involved.

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you are considering relocating with your children, or are concerned that the other parent may do so, you should take specialist legal advice based on the facts of your case. Purcell Solicitors is a specialist family law firm with extensive experience in child relocation and child abduction cases, both within the UK and internationally.