X, Re

The Applicant made the case that he was very concerned about how his relationship with his son would be affected if he was removed from the jurisdiction.� He made the case that his concern for his son stretched far beyond what was specifically defined in the Contact Order.� He made the case that as his son lived locally and went to school locally he had been able to remain active in his life from day to day.�

The Respondent has been going to the South of Ireland for some time with X and the applicant made the case when that happened, his telephone contact with him suffered considerably.� He gave evidence that the Respondent turned the telephone off when she realised that it was he who was calling, thus preventing him from speaking to his son.�

He was also concerned about how the move would affect X�s relationship with this elder siblings.� X has two brothers, neither of whom it would appear will communicate directly with the Respondent.� The Applicant has also one daughter who is over 18 years old and attending university in Northern Ireland.�

The Applicant also made the case that the Respondent�s new partner had a history of domestic violence and that in the past he had harmed himself and even attempted suicide.� He felt that the move would present a substantial risk for X.

The Respondent in evidence said that one of the reasons for the move was that following the Ancillary Relief proceedings finalised on the 8 June 2005 she was unable to get mortgage approval to have the matrimonial home transferred into her sole name.� Under the consent order entered into on 8 June 2005 in that event she was at liberty to sell the matrimonial home.