Indian Husband and Wife have Daughter together.
Husband and Wife separate and file for divorce in 2004.
Family court awards father visitation and timesharing based upon Husband’s and Wife’s agreement in 2008. The timesharing agreement is reflected in a family court order.
Wife subsequently obtains an excellent job offer – for a position in Canada.
Wife applies for a Visa. And Wife’s application is denied – because of the family court order granting Husband timesharing and visitation with Daughter.
Wife moves the family court for permission to relocate to Canada.
And the Indian family court grants Wife’s request in an ex parte (without prior notice to the other side) order, conditioning its ruling on Wife undertaking that she will allow Husband timesharing with Daughter whenever Wife is in India.
This Indian family court ruling bucks the last several years’ trend in Florida of very closely scrutinizing and liberally denying relocation requests by custodial parents.
But, in this particular case, the family court places great weight on the fact that Husband has not actually exercised any of his visitation or timesharing with Daughter since 2004.
The Indian family court recognizes that it is in the child’s best interests for Wife to take advantage of this economic opportunity. And that Wife should not be precluded from doing so by Husband’s rights set forth in an agreement and family court order that Husband is not honoring anyway.
Read more in this Times of India article: Errant father loses visitation rights after woman appeals
