BNT v BNS: Relocation of Children to Canada Dispute

In BNT v BNS, the Singapore High Court heard an appeal by the father against the District Judge's decision to allow the mother to relocate with their two children to Canada. The mother filed for divorce based on the father's unreasonable behavior, and sought permission to relocate to Toronto. The High Court, Judith Prakash J, allowed the father's appeal, prioritizing the welfare of the children and the importance of maintaining their relationship with their father, who is actively involved in their lives. The court dismissed the mother's application to relocate.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Family

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Singapore High Court denies mother's application to relocate children to Canada, prioritizing the father's active role in their lives.

1.7 Decision Date

23 September 2014

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
BNS	Respondent, Mother	Individual	Relocation Application Dismissed	Lost	Kelvin Lee Ming Hui of WNLEX LLC R S Bajwa of WNLEX LLC
BNT	Appellant, Father	Individual	Appeal Allowed	Won	Randolph Khoo of Drew & Napier LLC Anusha Prabhakaran of Drew & Napier LLC

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Judith Prakash	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Kelvin Lee Ming Hui	WNLEX LLC
R S Bajwa	WNLEX LLC
Randolph Khoo	Drew & Napier LLC
Anusha Prabhakaran	Drew & Napier LLC

4. Facts

The mother sought permission to relocate with the children to Toronto, Canada.
The father opposed the relocation, desiring to remain actively involved in the children's lives.
The parents were granted interim joint custody, with interim care and control to the mother.
The father has fully availed himself of his access rights and continues to participate meaningfully in the children’s lives.
The mother's relocation plan was not thoroughly thought through, calling into question her motivation.
The children lead a stable and comfortable life in Singapore, which is the only home they have known since 2008.
The mother has displayed hostility towards the father.

5. Formal Citations

BNT v BNS, Divorce Suit No 704 of 2011 (Registrar's Appeal Subordinate Courts No 30023 of 2013), [2014] SGHC 187

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2002-05-01	Marriage in Canada
2004-01-01	Couple moved to Thailand
2008-05-01	Family returned to Singapore
2011-02-17	Divorce filed by mother
2011-05-01	Both parties applied for Personal Protection Orders
2011-10-20	Interim joint custody granted to both parents, interim care and control to mother
2012-05-26	Interim judgment for divorce granted
2012-09-13	Mother applied for permission to relocate to Canada with children
2013-10-17	District Judge allowed mother’s application to relocate
2014-09-24	High Court allowed father’s appeal and dismissed mother’s application to relocate

7. Legal Issues

Relocation of Children
- Outcome: The court held that the welfare of the children militated against allowing the mother to relocate with them at this time.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Impact on child's welfare
  - Reasonableness of primary caregiver's desire to relocate
  - Risk of alienation from non-relocating parent
  - Adequacy of relocation plan
- Related Cases:
  - [2003] 1 SLR(R) 502
  - [2012] 3 SLR 627
  - [2001] Fam 473
Child's Welfare
- Outcome: The court emphasized that it is in the children's best interests to continue to have a meaningful relationship with both their mother and father.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Meaningful relationship with both parents
  - Emotional and psychological well-being
  - Stability and continuity of life
- Related Cases:
  - [2005] 3 SLR(R) 690
  - [2007] 3 SLR(R) 233

8. Remedies Sought

Permission to relocate children to Canada

9. Cause of Actions

Divorce
Application for Relocation

10. Practice Areas

Family Litigation
Divorce
Child Custody
Relocation Disputes

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Re C (an infant)	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2003] 1 SLR(R) 502	Singapore	Cited for the general approach to be followed when considering relocation applications, emphasizing the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration.
AZB v AYZ	High Court	Yes	[2012] 3 SLR 627	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the welfare of the child is the paramount and overriding consideration in relocation cases.
Payne v Payne	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division)	Yes	[2001] Fam 473	England and Wales	Cited for the principle that the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration and the impact of refusing the primary carer's reasonable relocation proposals.
MK v CK	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division)	Yes	[2011] EWCA Civ 793	England and Wales	Considered Payne in detail, noting that the welfare of the child is paramount and all the rest is guidance.
CX v CY (minor: custody and access)	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2005] 3 SLR(R) 690	Singapore	Observed that the welfare of a child is best secured by letting him enjoy the love, care and support of both parents.
BG v BF	High Court	Yes	[2007] 3 SLR(R) 233	Singapore	Stated that a child will feel more secure if both his parents continue to be involved in his life.
HKMB v LKL	Hong Kong District Court	Yes	[2007] HKCU 291	Hong Kong	Stated that it was important for the child’s emotional and psychological stability to maintain regular and meaningful contacts with both parents.
ABW v ABV	High Court	Yes	[2014] SGHC 29	Singapore	Cited to explain that the term alienation applies to a cluster of psychological responses in a child towards a parent with whom he once had a loving relationship.
Tan Kah Imm v D’Aranjo Joanne Abegail	High Court	Yes	[1998] SGHC 247	Singapore	Cited to show that the court will scrutinise the relocation plan with care to satisfy itself that there is a genuine motivation for the move and that the move is not intended to bring contact between the children and the parent who is left behind to an end.
Re W (Children)	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division)	Yes	[2009] EWCA Civ 160	England and Wales	Agreed with the judge below that the court is entitled to take into account the fact that the relocation application was brought to avoid the inconvenience and unpleasantness of conserving contact in deciding whether the application should be allowed.
Re S	Family Court	Yes	[2011] 1 FLR 1789	England and Wales	Cited to explain that the term alienation applies to a cluster of psychological responses in a child towards a parent with whom he once had a loving relationship.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Relocation
Care and control
Access rights
Child's welfare
Primary caregiver
Alienation
Meaningful relationship
Relocation plan

15.2 Keywords

Relocation
Child custody
Singapore
Family law
Divorce
Children's welfare

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Divorce	95
Family Law	90
Relocation	85
Child Custody	80
Child Support	75
Maintenance	70

16. Subjects

Family Law
Divorce
Child Custody
Relocation