Judgment: 2025-12-10 · Court archive

High Court refuses mother's appeal to relocate two children from West to Dublin

High Court · [2025] IEHC 765

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Ms D
  • Mr D
  • X
  • Y
  • Dr Geraldine Curtin
  • Mr Justice Max Barrett
What

High Court refuses mother's appeal to relocate two children from West to Dublin

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • The West
  • Dublin
  • High Court
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

In a judgment delivered on 10 December 2025, Mr Justice Max Barrett upheld the refusal of the relocation application, finding that Ms D had not established that the proposed move would be in the children's best interests.

The High Court has refused an application by a mother seeking to relocate the primary residence of her two children from the West to Dublin.

In a judgment delivered on 10 December 2025, Mr Justice Max Barrett upheld the refusal of the relocation application, finding that Ms D had not established that the proposed move would be in the children's best interests.

The separated parents have two children, X and Y, born in 2016 and 2017. Both are progressing well at school in the West, have established friendships and activities, and spend substantial time with their father, Mr D, and his extended family. Ms D remains their primary carer.

Ms D argued that her current home was unsuitable, that employment prospects were better in Dublin and that childcare and family support would be available there. She had recently taken a €35,000 job with a bank in Dublin and identified possible school places close to her proposed residence.

The court found those factors did not outweigh the disruption relocation would cause. A psychologist appointed in the family proceedings, Dr Geraldine Curtin, had recommended that the children remain in the West and told the court that stability was particularly important. X also receives additional support in his current school.

Mr Justice Barrett found that the proposed move would substantially reduce Mr D's mid-week parenting role and, in practical terms, change the present shared-care arrangement into one resembling mostly sole custody by Ms D. It would also distance the children from their paternal family, existing friendships and established routines.

The judge also found significant uncertainties around the proposed Dublin arrangements, including housing, Ms D's new working arrangements and reliance on maternal relatives for childcare.

The appeal was therefore refused and the children are to remain in the West under the existing arrangements. The court said it would hear the parties separately on costs.

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