Application for relocation — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 4, 5, 46R, 56, 132 & 133 — Family Violence Act 2018, ss 5, 9, 11 & 171 — New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 15 — K v B [2010] NZSC 112 — B v VB [relocation] [2008] NZFLR 1083 — Barton-Prescott v Director-General of Social Welfare [1997] 15 FRNZ 501 (HC) — B v VB [relocation] [2008] NZFLR 1083 (HC). The applicant mother sought to relocate to the UK with the parties' child in order to be closer to her family and friend network. The father opposed the move on the basis that this would alienate his relationship with the child, as well as the child's own relationship with her Māori whakapapa and paternal whanau. There had been safety concerns in regards to the child being in the care of her father as he had previously been convicted of assault charges against the applicant, and he had breached conditions on abstaining from alcohol before unsupervised contact. Section 4 of the Care of Children Act ("the Act") requires the welfare and best interests of the children to be the first and paramount consideration. Section 5 lists factors the judge must take into consideration when making a decision, in particular the children's safety must be ensured. Section 6 requires the Judge to consider the views of the children (although these views are not determinative). The Court concluded that though the child's safety would be protected whether or not relocation was permitted, relocation would see her cultural identity and paternal relationship suffer. The disadvantages identified by the applicant were found to not have impacted the child, and the applicant was said to have been managing ably. The application for relocation was declined, as it was not in the child's welfare and best interests. Judgment Date: 17 December 2020. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *