If the divorcing parents cannot come to an agreement on where the child(ren) should have their permanent residence, if the choice is between two different countries, it is likely that the court will get involved and decide. The focus of the court will always be the best interests of the child.
There are several considerations that are brought into the process. These include the children’s country of habitual residence and their country of domicile. These are different: the former is where the children have regularly been living, and the latter is which country is the permanent home.
For example, Turner and Jonas’ daughters were, at the time of Jonas filing for divorce, regularly living in the US. However, Turner claimed their permanent home, where the family had decided to settle, where the girls would be enrolled in school, had doctors and so forth, was England.
Other factors to be considered are the nationality of the parents and the children, and how practical it is for the children to travel between two different countries in order to keep up regular contact with both parents.
Financial factors are naturally a consideration in ordinary child arrangements. Maintenance payments, for example, commonly feature in divorce proceedings.
However, they are not standard as there are various criteria and circumstances that are considered, including how many children there are, the earnings of the parent paying maintenance, and the time the children spend with each parent.
When the divorce also has an international element to it, there is a bigger decision to be made on where the children will live and how the ex-couple will co-parent. The feasibility of regular travel between countries must consider the age of the child(ren), the financial implications and physical exertion.
The primary care of a child or children is often one of the most important considerations for the courts when determining an asset split and, while not a hard and fast rule, it is often considered that the parent who has primary care of the children will require more of the assets in order to ensure the children are housed appropriately.
This is not always the case as, of course, the asset base is a huge consideration as parties that are very wealthy and have a significant amount of assets are likely to be able to house children with a fair 50/50 split, simply because of the level of comfort they enjoy generally.
However, where assets are not significant, the children residing with one parent primarily, and spending time with the other, will often have a significant impact on any split of assets at the end of any marriage.
