It is not unusual in a domestic private law children case to be faced with a scenario where:
(i) prior to any proceedings commencing, one parent decamps with the child to another part of the country which, however far from the left behind parent, significantly impacts upon his or her ability to spend time with their child; and
(ii) by the time the matter gets to court, the move, from a welfare perspective, is effectively a fait accompli.
In such circumstances, the emotional angst for the left behind parent, and the tactical tension for their lawyer, is clearly understandable. Does he or she adopt a conciliatory approach, seeking to avoid court proceedings but leaving a risk that the longer the child remains in the new environment, the more likely it is that the child becomes settled and integrated? Or does he or she bring the matter to court urgently, achieving…