Relocation — welfare and best interests of children — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 4, 5, 6, 46 & 48 — Kacem v Bashir [2010] NZSC 112 — Brown v Argyll [2006] NZFLR 705, (2006) 25 FRNZ 383. This hearing was to determine the final parenting orders for the parties' two children, as well as to consider the mother's application for relocation to a city one hour's drive away from the location where she, the children and their father lived. There had been safety concerns in regards to the children being in the care of their father as he had previously been convicted of assaulting them and they had complained he had been violent towards them as recently as April 2018. The mother sought to relocate as her church had offered her subsidised accommodation and a stable job. Section 4 of the Care of Children Act ("the Act") requires the welfare and best interests of the children to be the first and paramount consideration. Section 5 lists factors the judge must take into consideration when making a decision, in particular the children's safety must be ensured. Section 6 requires the Judge to consider the views of the children (although these views are not determinative). The relocation application was granted. In regards to the father's contact, due to the history of violence and the reluctance of the children to have unsupervised contact, the Judge decided the best course of action was to slowly shift from supervised to unsupervised contact. This would ensure the children could have a healthy relationship with their father while protecting their safety. The Judge also authorised Court-funded counselling under s 46R of the Act to help the parties with parenting and guardianship issues. Judgment Date: 7 January 2019. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *