The High Court allowed a father to take his two children from Ireland to Hong Kong temporarily for one year, subject to a series of undertakings and welfare conditions. The order provides that he may remove them permanently after that year if he complies with the undertakings. It does not grant unconditional or immediate permission for permanent relocation.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Henry Abbott on 11 July 2008, arose from appeals against a Circuit Court order that had allowed the older child, N., to live in Hong Kong with his father while the younger child, E., remained in Ireland with her mother. The father appealed the refusal to let E. move; the mother cross-appealed the decision allowing N. to move and raised other issues, including maintenance and access.
By the High Court hearing, both parents agreed that the children could move to Hong Kong subject to conditions. The judge heard evidence from the parents and a child psychiatrist, and spoke with the children. N. and E. supported moving, but expressed different views about how often they should travel to Ireland to see their mother. The court relaxed fixed access arrangements to give them more flexibility, particularly N., while requiring access for E. outside Hong Kong.
The court appointed both parents joint guardians and joint custodians. Before the children can leave, the father must give undertakings to the court and provide a notarised agreement in the same terms. These include applying for a Hong Kong mirror order within six months, placing €200,000 with the mother’s solicitor to fund her access costs, and consenting to appropriate medical appointments, treatment, immunisation and screening. The judgment provides an alternative property charge of €400,000 if the father cannot provide the access fund in cash.
The order also requires the father to provide initial accommodation in Hong Kong and accommodation within practical reach of the children’s maternal grandmother thereafter. Both parents must support the children’s contact with family and friends. The children are to attend school in Hong Kong, with E. starting the second year of a GCSE course and the option to drop back a year if it proves too demanding; N. is to start A-level studies.
The mother is to have access in Hong Kong and Ireland on specified dates, with further visits in Hong Kong twice yearly from 2009. Some travel outside Hong Kong for N. is at his option; E.’s Ireland access is compulsory, with options to substitute shorter trips. The court retained the matter in Ireland for one year and discharged the restraint on removal only once the father complies with the undertakings.