Judgment: 2013-01-30 · Court archive

District Court approves grandmother’s custody and relocation plan for three children

The court supported the move to Country 1 subject to access arrangements and said the children must remain in Ireland until the interim care order expires and a mirror order is made there.

An Chúirt Dúiche / The District Court · [2013] IEDC 3

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Health Service Executive (Applicant)
  • Child 1
  • Child 4
What

The court supported the move to Country 1 subject to access arrangements and said the children must remain in Ireland until the interim care order expires and a mirror order is made there.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Country 1
  • Ireland
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The court said the children had established family, community, health and educational ties in Ireland, and recognised the importance of their relationships with their father, half-sibling and foster carers. It nevertheless concluded that the grandmother’s proposals could give the three children a better opportunity to grow up together and provide greater stability, provided she followed the access plan. The father would remain their joint guardian.

The District Court approved a maternal grandmother’s applications for custody of three children and permission to take them to live with her in Country 1, subject to access arrangements and steps that must be completed before they leave Ireland.

The decision, dated 30 January 2013, followed a hearing of three applications: the Health Service Executive’s request to extend an interim care order, and the grandmother’s requests for sole custody and permission to relocate the children. The children’s father supported the grandmother’s applications, provided he received an enforceable access order. The HSE and the children’s guardian ad litem also supported the private law applications, subject to assurances about the children’s welfare.

The children had been in HSE care on three occasions between October 2010 and June 2011 amid concerns including maternal alcohol misuse and neglect. At the time of the judgment they were in separate foster placements. The court noted that the HSE had been unable to provide one secure family placement for all three.

In considering the plan, the court reviewed psychological and therapeutic reports, social work evidence and the children’s views as reported by the guardian ad litem. The grandmother had proposed psychological support for Child 1, therapeutic work in Country 1, childcare assistance and annual visits to Ireland to support contact with the children’s father and their half-sibling, Child 4, if that child remained in Ireland. She also undertook to facilitate contact in Country 1 and indirect contact by video call, telephone and post.

The court said the children had established family, community, health and educational ties in Ireland, and recognised the importance of their relationships with their father, half-sibling and foster carers. It nevertheless concluded that the grandmother’s proposals could give the three children a better opportunity to grow up together and provide greater stability, provided she followed the access plan. The father would remain their joint guardian.

The judgment did not authorise the children to leave immediately. It said they must not be removed from Ireland until the interim care order had expired and a mirror order had been made by the appropriate court in Country 1. The source does not state the order’s expiry date or reproduce the terms of any final access order.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review