Case No. ZC21P00327
Family Court

Case No. ZC21P00327

Fecha: 24-Jun-2022

The parties’ wishes about relocation

30.Throughout her relationship with the father – both before and after their marriage - the mother has had, and has expressed, a wish to return to live in the USA. The strength and urgency of this desire and the father’s willingness to accede to it are issues that are in dispute. However, it is clear that the possibility of relocating to the USA has been a subject that has been raised by the mother throughout her relationship with the father and they have had discussions about a move both before and after the birth of the children.31.The father’s attitude to a move to the USA appears to have been much more ambivalent and has changed over the course of the parties’ relationship. I have no doubt that throughout the parties’ relationship the impetus to move to the USA has always been driven by the mother. There have certainly been times when the father appears to have been willing, in principle, to commit to a move to the USA. However, the sense that I have from the evidence is that whilst he has from time to time been willing to agree to a move to the USA as a theoretical concept, there have always been practical matters (the parties’ respective jobs, the position of the paternal grandmother, the deterioration in the parents’ relationship) which have meant that, from the father’s perspective, there has never been a right time to make such a move. 32.There have been a number of occasions when specific proposals or opportunities to move to the USA have arisen. At a relatively early stage in their relationship, the possibility of a role for the mother with her employer opened up in Michigan, but this was not pursued as the father objected to a move at that time. Whilst the parents are at odds as to the specific details of discussions that have taken place over the years (for example whether the father was aware that the mother had been offered, but had turned down, a job in Toronto in 2015) the broad nature of their respective positions that I have outlined above is clear from the evidence. 33.The mother has on a number of occasions sought to deal with the father’s equivocation on the question of a move by seeking to get him to commit to it in writing. She produced a document dated November 2016 written by her, but initialled by the father which includes the following statements: “We are going to the US whether your mum like it or not; We are going to the US, even if we don’t get jobs.”34.In 2018 shortly before LB was born, a homemade document – mostly in the father’s handwriting - was produced recording some heads of terms that had ostensibly been agreed between the parents regarding a relocation to the USA. There is a stark conflict in the evidence between them in relation to this incident, although both accept that their relationship was in difficulties at this time. The mother says that she wished to give birth in the USA and begged the father to come too bringing VB, but that he refused and told her that if she went she would never see VB again. The father says that the document it was drawn up in circumstances where the mother was threatening to get on a plane and travel to the USA to give birth leaving him and VB behind and that he was coerced into signing it.35.I cannot at this remove resolve the detail of this dispute. Clearly though, at the time that this document was drawn up the parents’ relationship had reached a crisis. In my view the likelihood is that this document provided the mother with the reassurance that she needed to be persuaded to remain in the UK and give birth to LB in the UK, I also consider that it is likely that it was entered into by the father with reluctance and as a result of pressure from the mother, although I consider it improbable that it was a result of duress or coercion in the sense these terms are understood by lawyers. These heads of terms were incorporated into a more formal parenting agreement dated 3 June 2018 under which they both agreed to relocate to the USA by February 2019 “regardless of their marital status, incomes or jobs”. This document was drawn up by solicitors acting for the mother. It was signed by the father although he did not take any legal advice before doing so. 36.No move took place within the time frame set out in the document although an application was made for the father to obtain a US spouse visa which would entitle him to live and work in the USA. The first stage of the visa process was completed in February 2019. The next stage of the process involved the father undergoing an interview at the US embassy in London, and although a number of appointments for this interview were made it never took place. In August 2020 the father told the mother he could not go through with the interview. He was concerned that they would move to the USA only to divorce, and he was also concerned that his own mother was unhappy about the proposed move. Following further discussions, a new appointment was booked for February 2021, but again the father indicated at the last minute that he could not go through with the interview. Shortly thereafter the mother issued her application to relocate.37.In fact, rather than cancelling the interview the father had postponed it on the pretext of having covid symptoms. However, following the issue of the application it was finally cancelled.38.I have no doubt that the mother’s wish to return to the USA has been long-standing, deeply held and consistent. Equally it is clear that the father has sought to equivocate and temporise, torn between his own deep roots in the UK and a wish to save his marriage. Ultimately though I do not consider that these issues assist me greatly in my analysis of which of the parties’ proposals is now in the children’s best interests.