Continue reading "Leave To Remove: No more Payne"
This post is only available to members.
Leave To Remove: No more Payne
Rachel Osgood looks at the impact of MK v CK on the guidelines in Payne v Payne on leave to remove ‘In considering the controversy surrounding Payne, Moore-Bick LJ suggested that it arose as a result of the failure to distinguish clearly between legal principle and guidance.’If you asked a family lawyer in recent years …
Cases Referenced
Cases in bold have further reading - click to view related articles.
- Chamberlain v De La Mare (1983) 4 FLR 434
- Lonslow v Hennig (formerly Lonslow) [1986] 2 FLR 378
- MH v GP (Child: Emigration) [1995] 2 FLR 106
- MK v CK (Children: Permanent Removal from Jurisdiction) [2011] EWCA Civ 793
- Nash v Nash [1973] 2 All ER 704
- Payne v Payne [2001] EWCA Civ 166
- Poel v Poel [1970] 1 WLR 1469
- Re AR (A Child: Relocation) [2010] EWHC 1346 (Fam)
- Re W (Children) [2011] EWCA Civ 345
- Re Y (Leave to Remove from Jurisdiction) [2004] 2 FLR 330