Court of Appeal upholds mother's relocation to UAE despite domestic abuse concerns

The Court of Appeal in England and Wales delivered a significant judgement on 14th July 2025 in O, Re (Domestic Abuse: International Relocation) [2025] EWCA Civ 888, addressing the complex interplay between domestic abuse and international child relocation. Lord Justice Cobb's ruling examined a mother's application to relocate her two sons, C and F, from the UK to the United Arab Emirates against their father's objections.

Background and proceedings

The case arose from a Family Court decision granting the mother permission to remove the children from the UK permanently. The father, challenging this decision, raised concerns about the enforceability of English custody orders under UAE law and the potential severance of his relationship with the children.

The mother, a medical consultant, and father, a dentist, had endured a tumultuous relationship marked by physical and emotional abuse. The Court's findings revealed that domestic violence had inflicted severe psychological harm on both the mother and children, creating an environment requiring immediate intervention.

Key arguments and evidence

The mother presented compelling evidence of her need to escape the abusive environment and provide stability for her children. She argued that relocation to the UAE would enable her to secure new employment and achieve financial independence, with plans to return to England within five years when her eldest son reaches secondary school age.

The father raised jurisdictional concerns, particularly highlighting that the UAE lacks provisions for enforcing foreign custody agreements involving unmarried parents. He argued that relocation would effectively terminate his relationship with the children and create enforcement difficulties for any future contact arrangements.

Court's analysis and reasoning

The Court emphasised the paramountcy principle under the Children Act 1989, determining that the children's welfare must take precedence over other considerations. Critically, the judgement found that maintaining the status quo was not serving the children's best interests, as existing supervised visits were proving detrimental to their well-being.

The Court recognised that the father's history of abuse warranted significant changes to the children's living arrangements. The judgement acknowledged that creating physical distance from the trauma was essential for healing and that positive relationships could be better cultivated in a less constrained environment, free from the fear and anxiety caused by the father's behaviour.

Implications and future arrangements

Despite upholding the mother's relocation application, the Court mandated further hearings to determine post-relocation child arrangements. This ensures that the father's interests are considered within an appropriately structured framework whilst preserving some form of contact to maintain the children's relationship with both parents.

The ruling demonstrates an evolving judicial understanding of domestic abuse's lasting effects on family dynamics and parenting capabilities. The Court's decision reflects a nuanced approach that balances parental rights with the necessity for healing, whilst navigating the complexities of international law and jurisdictional limitations.

This judgement establishes important precedent for future cases involving domestic abuse and international relocation, reinforcing that children's welfare remains paramount even when faced with complex jurisdictional challenges and the legitimate concerns of non-abusive parents seeking to maintain contact across international boundaries.