The father’s materials set out that he would assist in the mother continuing to have access if the child were returned to him. The child’s return to the father’s physical custody, to his care, custody, maintenance and education, with the mother having access that the father was agreeing to facilitate, would not be the exact status quo before the wrongful retention (as the parties were to have joint legal custody) but it would, on a practical level from the perspective of the child, be analogous to the circumstances in existence before the mother retained the child. In that sense, this case can be distinguished from Thomson v. Thomson and similar cases where the child’s return to a parent who had not been the custodial parent at the time of the retention would be contrary to the pre-existing status quo.
Get a full legal research memo!
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.