- Everything (342)
- Model letter (0)
- Practice note (1)
- Precedent (0)
- Uploads (0)
- Tools (0)
- Article (0)
- Case note (90)
- News (2)
- Polls (0)
- CPD course (0)
- CPD diploma (0)
- Training note (0)
- Webinar (1)
- Downloads (0)
- Form (0)
- Judgment (248)
- Practice direction (0)
- Rule (0)
- SI (0)
- Statute (0)
- International regs (0)
- Mr Justice Mostyn on whether he has the power to revoke a return order in proceedings under the Child Abduction & Custody Act. Judgment, 06/06/2014, free
- A Hague Convention 1980 case which provides a useful reminder for the threshold of some of the various defences (consent, child’s objections and exposure to an unacceptable or intolerable risk of physical or psychological harm). All defences were rejected and a return order made. Judgment, 05/06/2014, free
- Lithuanian mother was living in Northern Ireland while the child K resided with his grandmother in Lithuania. K regarded the grandmother as his mother and had little contact with his real mother and barely knew her. The mother forcibly removed the child and took him to Ireland. Art 3 of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction says that the taking or keeping of a child is only "wrongful" if it is in breach of "rights of custody".This case was concerned with the interpretation of "rights of custody" - was it to be interpreted strictly and literally as a reference to rights which are already legally recognised and enforceable? Or was it to be interpreted purposively as a reference to a wider category of what have been termed "inchoate rights", the existence of which would have been legally recognised had the question arisen before the removal or retention in question? Lady Hale, with whom 3 of the other 4 Justices agreed, ruled that the grandmother's status did constitute "rights of custody" in relation to K on the day when he was removed for the purpose of the Convention and the Regulation and that therefore he should be returned to Lithuania. Judgment, 16/05/2014, free
- Judgment concerning habitual residence of a child involving a mother in the UK and a father in Singapore, where the father claimed the mother's consent in removing the child. The judge found that the child had not acquired habitual residence in Singapore and ordered return with a penal notice attached. Judgment, 03/04/2014, free
- Appeal arising from application by father for return of child to France under the 1980 Hague Convention where return had been stayed pending this appeal by the mother on Article 13(b) grounds. Appeal dismissed. The judge's solution in the lower court was not wrong as she had considered the material factors with her 'eyes open' to the potential problems involved. Judgment, 28/03/2014, free
- Hague Convention case where the child, whom the judge ruled was habitually resident in the UK and had been made a ward of court soon after birth, had been taken to the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. At the time the father was under an order of probation awarded by a criminal court in relation to an offence of domestic violence. The judge agreed that the name of the father and the child could be made public, emphasising that "this is not a secret court." Judgment, 24/03/2014, free
- A Hague Convention case where the English mother, who was granted custody of the child with permission for him to live in England with her, was allowed to take the child from Spain to England having made an undertaking to obey any order of the appeal court and return him if required to do so. The Moroccan father's appeal was successful but the mother did not comply with the order. The English court ordered that the child be returned to Spain. Judgment, 19/03/2014, free
- Hague Convention proceedings brought by F who maintained he had not consented to the children being permanently relocated from the USA to England. The judge declined to exercise the inherent jurisdiction as it would not be in the interests of the children's welfare to return them to the USA. Judgment, 18/03/2014, free
- A wrongful removal case where the mother had taken the child to Wales without the permission of the Italian court or the father. Her appeal here was against a refusal to allow her to instruct an adult psychiatrist as an expert and against the order for return. The appeal on ground 1 was dismissed on the basis that the material before the court simply failed to establish that such an instruction was "necessary". The appeal against the order for return also failed. Judgment, 13/03/2014, free
- The child was the subject of proceedings in England and Spain. The English court had declared that she was habitually resident in the UK and made other consequential directions. The Spanish court had refused to return her to this jurisdiction pursuant to the Hague Convention. M's application was to set aside declarations made by the English Court as to (i) habitual residence (ii) wrongful retention. Alternatively she invited the court to reassess habitual residence as at today's date. Judgment, 10/03/2014, free