[2025] EWHC 2961 (Fam)

It is common ground that the father was supportive of the mother’s application for employment in Japan in early 2024. It is also accepted that this was going to be a permanent position that would involve the mother living in in Japan.

The parents exchanged e mails as to the contents of her covering letter or e mail supporting the application. This was in January 2024 [2/14]. I digress to comment that this does not sit entirely comfortably with the impression within the father’s evidence [61/510] “…However, when the Applicant went back to Japan on holiday in February 2024, she decided to interview for a demanding position ….. and was successful”.

I note that the father made a number of suggestions to mother in terms refining her application. He suggested in one e mail [2/14] that she should include the following: “I am Japanese native, where my career has been predominantly based, but have been living in the UK for the last 3 years with my husband and daughter (both British citizens)”. The mother framed this aspect [2/14] rather differently: “After marriage, I established a dual-residency lifestyle, ……making it my current base alongside Japan”. I was informed that the mother settled on the following in the final e mail for her application: “As a native Japanese professional who has spent the last three years living in the UK with my British husband and daughter, I bring a unique blend of cultural understanding and international experience”.

I also note that the father helped the mother with the preparation for her presentation that formed part of the selection process [10/14] in February 2024.

On any view, this recruitment exercise took place at a time when the parents remained in a committed relationship, with no ulterior motives on the part of either of in terms of any litigation. The e mail exchange appears to reflect a difference of perspective between them at the time as to mother’s circumstances over the preceding years. The father’s suggestion appears to have influenced the mother’s final drafting. However, I remind myself that the final version referred to above was submitted in an entirely different context.. In short, I draw no inference adverse to the mother’s case from this e mail exchange.

The father now contends that they hoped the mother’s role could “… lead to future work opportunities back in the UK, as she had previously been unable to find work in the UK”. This is denied by the mother. I have to say that I struggle to follow the logic and force of the father’s case in that regard.

I also note that father says [61/510] that at this time “…we agreed to an international co-parenting plan where [the child] would spend periods with each parent in both countries and we would try and spend as much time together as a family as possible”. He later adds “… We were able to successfully co-parent internationally between February 2024 and December 2024”. They were also exploring buying a property in Japan at this time.