Skip to content

Re S (Transfer of Residence) [2010] EWCA Civ 219

TL;DR. The earliest leading UK Court of Appeal decision endorsing transfer of residence as a remedy in intractable contact-dispute / PA-context cases. Predates Re W (Children) [2012] EWCA Civ 999 and provides the foundational doctrinal anchor that transfer is a legitimate court tool, not a draconian extreme. Together with Re W, forms the UK appellate doctrine on residence transfer as PA remedy.

Maintained by Alan Markson · Last reviewed: 2026-05-17 · License: CC BY 4.0

Citation

Re S (Transfer of Residence) [2010] EWCA Civ 219

Holding

The Court of Appeal upheld a first-instance transfer of residence in an intractable contact dispute, holding:

  1. Transfer of residence is a legitimate remedy when conventional measures (contact orders, supervised contact, enforcement) have demonstrably failed
  2. The trial judge has wide discretion in shaping the remedy to the specific facts
  3. The child's stated preferences cannot be the sole determinant when alienation pattern is documented
  4. Best interests under the Children Act 1989 govern; not a presumption against transfer

This was the first major appellate endorsement in England that the family court has the authority to use residence transfer to remedy entrenched PA — opening the doctrinal door that Re W [2012], Re H-N [2021], and Re C [2023] later refined.

Significance

Re S is the doctrinal seed for the UK PA-remedy framework:

  • 2010 Re S — transfer of residence available
  • 2012 Re W [2012] EWCA Civ 999 — transfer endorsed in further intractable case; appellate deference confirmed
  • 2021 Re H-N [2021] EWCA Civ 448 — dual-frame abuse + alienation analysis
  • 2023 Re C [2023] EWHC 345 (Fam) — behavior-frame expert testimony operationalized

Without Re S, the later cases would have lacked the foundational doctrinal underpinning.

Practical use

Sample UK motion language:

Per Re S (Transfer of Residence) [2010] EWCA Civ 219 and Re W (Children) [2012] EWCA Civ 999, this Court has clear appellate authority to consider transfer of residence as a remedy in intractable contact disputes where conventional measures have demonstrably failed over [N] years. The documented pattern of unenforced contact orders, alienating behaviors per Baker's 8 indicators, and the documented developmental cost of continued delay (per Schore 2001, Lombardo 2013) collectively justify the Court considering this remedy. The Applicant respectfully submits the supporting evidence pack for the Court's discretion.

The intractable-contact-dispute frame

Re S established that certain custody cases reach a procedural state where:

  • Multiple contact orders have been issued + ignored
  • Mediation has been attempted + failed
  • Supervised contact has been deployed + obstructed
  • Financial penalties / unpaid work orders have been issued + ignored
  • Reunification therapy has been ordered + sabotaged

In this configuration, the court is not bound to continue cycling through measures that have demonstrably failed. Residence transfer becomes a legitimate option.

How this interacts with the international convergence

UK transfer-of-residence doctrine sits alongside parallel international tools:

Jurisdiction Available transfer mechanism
UK Re S 2010 + Re W 2012 (Court of Appeal authority)
US Harman/Lorandos 2020 data: ~40-50% of substantiated PA cases produce custody modification
Italy Civil Code 337-bis et seq. + Cassazione 9691/2022
Belgium Civil Code Art. 374 amendments + 387ter enforcement
Australia Family Law Act s60CC (post-2024) + U v U principles
ECHR Strand Lobben v Norway 2019 — affirmative reunification duty

All operate from the shared principle: when the alienator's behavior is structurally incompatible with the child's right to relationship with both parents, residence is an available remedy.

Citing posts

# Post
17 https://www.antialienate.com/blog/pa-vs-estrangement-courts
29 https://www.antialienate.com/blog/emergency-motions-pa
37 https://www.antialienate.com/blog/when-to-go-to-trial-vs-settle
67 https://www.antialienate.com/blog/article-8-motion-template-pack

Primary source

  • BAILII: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/219.html

Disclaimer

Wiki entry, not legal advice.

CC BY 4.0 · antialienate.com