The first step in any matter concerning a potential relocation of a child is to discuss the matter directly with the other parent. Parties to family law proceedings in relation to parenting matters are required to attend mediation with a registered Family Dispute Resolution Practitioner. In the event a resolution cannot be reached the parties will be issued with a section 60I certificate, which is required to commence proceedings in the Family Court of Western Australia.
The paramount consideration of the Family Court in all parenting matters, including those concerning an application for a change in the child's living arrangements, is the best interests of the child.
proposals for the non-resident parent to spend time with and/or communicate with the child.
It is important to remember that the Family Court must consider the competing proposals presented by each parent however the Family Court may deviate from both of those proposals and make alternative orders as they consider are in the best interests of the child. The best interests of the child is to be carefully considered by the Family Court against the right to freedom of movement of the parents involved.
If one parent unilaterally relocates a child or fails to return the child to your care you may be able to seek a recovery order in the Family Court. In circumstances which are urgent (such as concerns for the safety of the child) a recovery order may be heard on an ex-parte basis. This means that the hearing will be on the same day as the application is filed or as soon as possible thereafter.
In Western Australia, orders for recovery granted by the Family Court are acted upon by the West Australian Police.
In the event that you are considering relocating with a child we recommend that you contact a member of our family law team to discuss the merits of your application. If you are concerned that your former partner has relocated with your child or refuses to return your child, please contact our offices to schedule an urgent appointment.
 Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s60CC.
 U v U (2002) 211 CLR 238 at [259-260].
 Morgan & Miles (2007) FLC 93-343.