Janet Bazley KC and Olivia Magennis, instructed by Jemma Dally of Goodman Ray, represented the mother in S v B [2026] EWFC 139 (B).

This welfare judgment followed an earlier fact-finding hearing at which the father was found to have perpetrated sustained physical and psychological abuse against the mother (represented by Janet Bazley KC). At the welfare hearing, the Court accepted that the father’s treatment of the mother had cause her complex PTSD. He granted the mother permission to relocate permanently with the child (aged 4) to her home country, alongside a change of surname and sole decision-making authority, with no direct contact to the father.

Expert evidence from an independent social worker and a consultant forensic psychologist supported relocation, finding the mother's complex PTSD was attributable to the abuse and that continued proximity to the father and the litigation risked further harm, while relocation offered genuine therapeutic benefit.

The judge found the father had shown limited insight into his abusive conduct despite completing intervention work, and that his resources-based case for keeping the child in England could not outweigh her core welfare need for safe, consistent care from her primary carer, free from an ongoing threat environment.

The court also had to determine several complex issues arising alongside the proposed relocation, including:

• What, if any, contact should take place post-relocation if permitted; 
• Whether the mother should be permitted to apply for the child's passport and related national identity documentation for the mother’s home country without the father's consent; 
• Whether the child's surname should be changed to better reflect both sides of her heritage; and
• Whether, following relocation, the mother should have primary decision-making responsibility in relation to the child's welfare and upbringing.

Direct contact did not continue post-relocation; the court instead ordered a short period of video contact, quarterly written and photographic updates, permitted the surname change and issue of the child's passport without the father's consent.

The father’s application for permission to appeal the welfare decision was refused as being wholly without merit.