A parent considering a move abroad with a child should resolve the legal authority for that move before committing to a new school, cancelling a UAE home or making travel arrangements. Family lawyers in Dubai assess the applicable custody framework, existing orders and the effect of the proposed move on the child. A residence visa, passport or custody award does not necessarily provide the parental consent or court permission needed for international travel.
The central distinction is between a temporary journey with an intended return and a change to the child’s established home. A holiday agreement cannot safely be treated as approval for permanent residence overseas. The application, supporting evidence and proposed parenting arrangements should describe the real plan from the outset.
The Abu Dhabi Civil Family Court registered 19,000 civil marriage contracts in 2025, according to its statistics reported by Emirates News Agency on 19 January 2026. The service is available to foreign residents and visitors. These figures provide context for internationally connected families; they do not measure Dubai relocation applications or the likelihood of obtaining travel permission.
Dubai families may fall under different federal personal status regimes. Federal Decree Law No. 41 of 2024 applies according to its scope and permitted choice of law provisions. It distinguishes custody from guardianship and gives the mother priority after separation, subject to the prescribed conditions, the statutory order and the child’s interests.
Eligible non Muslim families may instead be governed by Federal Decree Law No. 41 of 2022 on Civil Personal Status. Its starting point after divorce is joint and equal custody, with judicial routes for resolving disagreements or changing the arrangement. Eligibility and applicable law should be established before using a rule from one regime to predict the result under another.
Existing judgments and approved agreements are equally important. They may regulate residence, contact, travel documents or particular journeys. Review the full operative wording and subsequent variations. A parent should not assume that informal discussions have changed an enforceable order.
Article 116 permits a custodial parent to travel outside the UAE with the written approval of the other parent, or the relevant guardian in the circumstances specified by the law. A parent seeking judicial permission should provide a clear destination, purpose, itinerary and intended return date. Consent should be specific enough to show what journey was actually agreed.
The court may authorise travel for a period or periods totalling up to 60 days per year against a guarantee it accepts for the child’s return. The statutory year runs from the first permission. The court may exceed that period where travel benefits the child, is for treatment or meets another necessity it determines, after hearing the relevant parent or guardian unless attendance is impossible.
These provisions describe a court supervised route, not an annual entitlement that can be exercised without permission. They should not be presented as a general ban on every trip lasting more than 60 days. The court’s order, the consent obtained and the circumstances of the journey require individual assessment.
Article 21 of Cabinet Resolution No. 122 of 2023 addresses travel under the federal civil personal status framework. Where joint custody operates and one parent objects, the other cannot decide unilaterally to take the child abroad. An application may be made to the competent court, which can require sufficient guarantees for the child’s return and exercises discretion over the request.
Article 20 permits judicial intervention in disputes concerning joint custody. Article 22 separately allows either parent after divorce to seek a temporary restriction on the child’s travel, explaining the objection. A court application should therefore engage with the actual disagreement, such as an unclear return plan or interruption to contact, rather than assuming that joint custody automatically determines the outcome.
A permanent move changes the circumstances in which custody and contact operate. Under Article 115 of the 2024 Personal Status Law, moving with the intention of residing somewhere that does not meet the child’s interests is a ground for loss of custody. The provision does not mean that every move automatically removes custody; the child’s interests remain central to the assessment.
Parents seeking relocation should present evidence that explains how the proposal would work. Useful material can include a confirmed home, lawful residence arrangements, realistic school options, medical provision and a sustainable budget. The explanation should address why the move is proposed and the alternatives available if it is refused. An employment offer or family support network can support that explanation, but should not be treated as a guarantee of permission.
The proposed relationship with the other parent also requires detail. Consider school holidays, the cost and duration of travel, handover arrangements and regular communication. A promise to “allow visits” leaves practical questions unanswered. Where contact requires international journeys, the proposal should explain who will organise them and meet the expense.
If relocation is agreed, the agreement should distinguish permanent residence from temporary visits and address how the arrangement will be recognised or implemented in the destination country. Obtain the necessary judicial approval or variation where required. Agreement between parents does not justify ignoring an existing travel restriction.
Article 117 of the 2024 Personal Status Law allows the guardian to retain the child’s passport, subject to handing it to the custodian for authorised travel. The court may intervene where the guardian is obstructive about handing it over when needed. Possessing the passport is therefore a separate question from obtaining permission for the proposed journey.
Educational guardianship also has a defined purpose. Article 112 gives the custodial mother educational guardianship in the child’s interests and provides judicial procedures for disputes or transfer where appropriate. It should not be interpreted as an unrestricted power to relocate the child abroad. School selection, custody, travel approval and changes to residence may require separate consideration.
Parents should obtain orders that address the actual obstacle. If the issue is release of a passport, the application should explain that need. If the real intention is permanent residence abroad, describing the request as a short school visit can leave the central dispute unresolved.
Under Article 122 of the 2024 Personal Status Law, a child who reaches 15 may choose to reside with either parent unless the child’s interests require otherwise. This does not give the child an independent power to approve an international move or disapply travel requirements. The legal significance of the child’s preference depends on the governing framework and the decision being made.
Parents should avoid coaching the child or making the child responsible for the outcome. Evidence of educational needs, health, established relationships and daily routines can help explain the effect of relocation without requiring the child to argue either parent’s case.
The UAE is not a contracting party to the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention or the 1996 Hague Child Protection Convention. A family should therefore not assume that those treaty mechanisms will secure return or recognition in a dispute involving the UAE. Advice in the proposed destination is useful before the move is finalised.
Family lawyers in Dubai can coordinate the local applications with advice on recognition abroad. The proposed terms should address the child’s residence and contact while remaining realistic about how each country’s courts can act. A carefully documented plan gives the court concrete arrangements to evaluate and gives both parents clearer responsibilities if permission is granted.
A sole custody award does not automatically resolve travel permission, guardianship or restrictions in existing orders. Review its precise terms and the applicable law. Permanent relocation should be addressed expressly rather than inferred from responsibility for daily care.
That depends on the actual terms, but consent limited to a holiday should not be treated as consent to a permanent move. If circumstances change, obtain advice and seek the necessary agreement or order before departing from the authorised arrangements.
An objection does not remove the court’s power to consider travel. The available application depends on the governing regime and existing orders. A clear itinerary, explanation of the child’s needs and credible return arrangements help the court assess the request and any objection.
Yes. Address school holidays, travel time and cost, handovers and regular communication. Explain who will arrange journeys and pay for them, and obtain destination-country advice on how the proposed terms can operate there.
No automatic permission should be inferred from passport possession. Review consent, the governing custody framework and existing restrictions. An application for release of a passport and an application concerning permanent residence abroad address different issues.
Dr. Hassan Elhais is a Senior Legal Consultant at Amal Al Rashedi Lawyers and Legal Consultants in Dubai. He advises on UAE family, civil, commercial and criminal law matters.
اتصل بنا
اتصل بنا
