Relocation — welfare and best interests of child — definition of protect — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 4, 5, 6, 15, 46R & 77 — Domestic Violence Act 1995, s 3 — Bashir v Kacem [2010] NZFLR 865 — Kacem v Bashir [2010] NZFLR 884 — MBS v EAC [2005] NZFLR 1 — S v O [Relocation] [2006] NZFLR 1 — L v K (2010) 28 FRNZ 692 (CA). Following the father obtaining an order preventing removal of the children from New Zealand, the mother of two children applied to discharge that order, for a parenting order for day-to-day care and sought an order that the children be permitted to relocate to Australia. The father opposed the application. The mother provided very little evidence, there was no information about where they would live, how she would earn money or what psychological resources would be provided for the children (this was especially important as one of the children was displaying very concerning behaviour). The children were well settled in New Zealand and there were no safety risks in relation to the father. The Judge decided, by a significant margin, it was in the welfare and best interests of the children not to relocate, so the application was declined. Judgment Date: 18 June 2019. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *