ScotCS CSOH – 130 Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 Scotland Children Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.558114
(Extra Division, Inner House – Opinion of Lord Malcolm) – appeal in application for order of return of two children to their father in France. The partis disputed whether Scotland had become habitually resident in Scotland, and also whether the father had consented to their removal to Scotland. Held: The Lord ordinary granted the appeal … Continue reading AR, Re An Order Under The Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985: SCS 14 Nov 2014
 ScotCS CSOH – 187 Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 Scotland, Children Updated: 27 November 2021; Ref: scu.519241
 NIFam 3 Bailii Northern Ireland, Children Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.511121
The petitioner sought an order for the return of his two children to Spain, they having been brought to Scotland by their mother. . .
The two girls were with their mother in Scotland. The father, living in France, sought their return to France:
Held: The court granted the father’s application. The Lord Ordinary: ‘After considering all the relevant evidence I am satisfied . .
Father’s application dated 18th August 2020 under the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children (‘the 1996 Hague Convention’) that jurisdiction be transferred to Switzerland pursuant to Article 8 of that Convention where the parties’ child is currently living with her … Continue reading A (A Child) (Abduction: Jurisdiction: 1996 Hague Convention): FD 10 Mar 2021
Whether TH is habitually resident in England or in the USA. Mr David Rees QC  EWHC 3110 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.669917
F applied for an order for the return to Malta of the couple’s daughter. M appealed saying that the judge had erred when meeting the daughter having gone beyond the permitted limits. The daughter had objected to being returned, but the judge had decided that she was ambivalent about the return. Held: Moore-Bick, Black, McFarlane … Continue reading Re KP (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody): CA 1 May 2014
Baker J  EWHC 2824 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 Children Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553908
The Honourable Mr Justice Macdonald  EWHC 3231 (Fam) Bailii Children Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.670688
The Honourable Mr Justice Hayden  EWHC 3467 (Fam) Bailii 1980 Hague Convention, Children Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.670691
Judgment on the applicant father’s application for an order that his daughter Kate, who is now aged 14, be returned forthwith to Malta pursuant to Article 12 of the Hague Convention on the International Aspects of Child Abduction 1980, as incorporated domestically by the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985. Held: Mostyn J said: ‘there … Continue reading SP (Father) v EB (Mother) and Another: FD 26 Nov 2014
M and children had come back to England from Australia, and had F’s consent to stay for another year. She then applied for British Citizenship for the children without F’s knowledge. F now sought their return. Held: The children had become habitually resident in the UK. There was no concept of repudiatory retention known to … Continue reading Re P and O (Child Abduction: Anticipatory Breach): FD 10 Nov 2016
F appealed against refusal of an order requiring M to return their two children to Australia. Black, Sharp, Thirlwall LJJ  EWCA Civ 980,  1 All ER 476,  1 FLR 186,  3 FCR 719,  WLR(D) 479 Bailii, WLRD Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – … Continue reading In Re C (Children): CA 12 Jul 2017
‘This appeal concerns the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. It raises general questions relating to: (1) the place which the habitual residence of the child occupies in the scheme of that Convention, and (2) whether and when a wrongful retention of a child may occur if the travelling parent originally … Continue reading Re C (Children): SC 14 Feb 2018
The parents had married under shariah law. They left the US to return to the father’s home country Saudi Arabia. They parted, and the mother brought their son to England against the father’s wishes and in breach of an agreement. The father sought his summary return to Saudi Arabia, a non-Convention country. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Re J (A Child), Re (Child returned abroad: Convention Rights); (Custody Rights: Jurisdiction): HL 16 Jun 2005
The child had been removed to NI by his mother. She had left him as a baby with her parents in Latvia, and they had cared for him under an informal arrangement for several years. M had taken the boy from the street in Latvia. The grandparents sought a declaration that Karl was being wrongfully … Continue reading VK and AK v CC: CANI 19 Feb 2014
Mr Teertha Gupta Qc  EWHC 2643 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children Updated: 15 December 2021; Ref: scu.669901
For the purposes of Article 13 of the Convention, the question whether the wronged parent has ‘acquiesced’ in the removal or retention of the child depends upon his actual state of mind of the parent: ‘the court is primarily concerned, not with the question of the other parent’s perception of the applicant’s conduct, but with … Continue reading In re S (Minors) (Abduction: Acquiescence): 1994
Erroneous legal advice may be taken into account when deciding whether there had been acquiescence. Times 16-Feb-1994 Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 Sch 1 England and Wales Children Updated: 13 December 2021; Ref: scu.82181
The father sought the return of his son to Romania. The mother had brought him here without the father’s consent. The father said that a Romanian court had ordered his return, but the expert evidence as to the effect of the order was conflicting. Held: The child was to be returned to Romania. Hedley J … Continue reading In re D (a Child): FD 2006
The test for determining whether a child was habitually resident in a place is whether there was some degree of integration by her (or him) in a social and family environment there, may the court, in making that determination in relation to an adolescent child who has resided, particularly if only for a short time, … Continue reading In re LC (Children): SC 15 Jan 2014
Hogg J  EWHC 4149 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.526380
F sought the return of his son K to the US. K had been brought here by M after a court order in the US,but the father subsequently appealed sucessfully, obtaining an order for K’s return. M said that the UK court had originally and correctly found K to be habitually resident in the UK, … Continue reading DL v EL (Hague Abduction Convention: effect of reversal of return order on appeal): FD 17 Jan 2013
The court was asked whether it should order the return to France of two little girls who have been living with their mother in Scotland since July 2013. The issue arose under article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, as incorporated into the law of the United … Continue reading AR v RN (Scotland): SC 22 May 2015
The mother appealed against an order confirmed by the Court of Appeal for the return of her child to Australia. The mother and father had cohabited in Sydney, before M returned with S without F’s consent or the permission of an Australian court. The court had found that M faced significant risk of abuse from … Continue reading Re S (A Child): SC 14 Mar 2012
Two children were born in Norway to a British mother (M) and Norwegian father (F). Having lived in Norway, M brought them to England to stay, but without F’s knowledge or consent. M replied to his application for their return that the children would be at risk if returned, alleging psychological abuse by F. She … Continue reading Re E (Children) (Abduction: Custody Appeal): SC 10 Jun 2011
On 21 March 1990 the mother removed the child, aged two, from Australia, where he had been habitually resident, to England with the intention of permanently residing here. She did so without the knowledge of the father who also resided in Australia but who, not having been married to the mother, had at that time … Continue reading In re J (a Minor) (Abduction: Custody rights): HL 1 Jul 1990
The father sought leave to appeal against care orders made in respect of his three children. The family were Pakistani Pathan muslims. There had been disputes and violence within the extended family. One family member sought protection but was now alleged herself to be responsible for threats and violence. After a fire, the children were … Continue reading AM v Local Authority and Another; Re B-M (Care Orders): CA 16 Mar 2009
The mother and father were orthodox Jews. The mother brought the children to England from Israel against the father’s wishes. She said that he had acquiesced in their staying here by asking for them to be returned to Israel temporarily. The father responded that he had acted only to follow the edicts of the Beth … Continue reading Re H, H v H (Child Abduction: Acquiescence): HL 10 Apr 1997
Acquisition of Habitual Residence Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day. Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member state such as the United States. The Regulation also deals with how child … Continue reading A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening): SC 9 Sep 2013
The mother had wrongfully removed the children from Australia to this country. The father wrote to the mother saying that ‘I think you know that what you have done is illegal, but I’m not going to fight it’ and generally giving the impression that . .
Parties challenged the rule allowing the respondent to deny the right to enter or remain here to non EU citizens marrying a person settled and present here where either party was under the age of 21. The aim of the rule was to deter forced . .
Rights of custody are to be distinguished from mere rights of access. . .
The father sought the return to Spain of the family’s four children, the judge had ordered their return, but the mother absconded with them to Wales. They were found and two returned, but after a scene at the airport tow stayed. The mother now . .
After a divorce, the Belgian Court had granted the father a contact order, for him to receive her at home at holidays. The mother moved to England, breaching the order. The father had the order registered here, then sought to enforce it. The court . .
The mother had unlawfully brought her son here from Romania, and now appealed an order for his return.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. . .
The father applied for the return of his children with him to Israel. . .
The parents, both of Nigerian origin had started a family in Ireland. The mother came to England seeking asylum, going first to Salford and then to London. The father sought their return under the 1985 Act. The court had made interim orders for the . .
An illegitimate child’s habitual country of residence is determined at the date of death of his mother when he was to be removed following the death. Where the mother of an illegitimate child who is resident in England dies and the grandmother takes . .
The House addressed the question whether wrongful removal and wrongful retention were mutually exclusive concepts. The issue arose in the context of the commencement date for the 1985 Act as between the two States involved.
Held: For the . .
An application was made under the 1985 Act. The mother answered by saying that the removal of the child had been approved by the father.
Held: The mother’s appeal failed. The father had clearly indicated that he withdrew his consent before the . .
M’s application for the return of her three children, after their abduction by their father. . .
The father sought the return of his daughter to Romania, saying she had been taken to the UK in breach of a court order.
Held: The relevant court order pre-dated the accession of Romania to the Convention. Enforceability flowed from eth date . .
Three children had been brought from Zimbabwe by their mother against the wishes of the father and in breach of his rights there. The mother appealed an order for their return.
Held: The mother’s appeal was allowed. The House had to consider . .
The child had been born to parents who married and later divorced in Romania. The mother brought him to England without the father’s consent, and now appealed an order for his return.
Held: The mother’s appeal succeeded. The Convention . .
Child abduction proceedings had been issued after the father had applied for residence here. The mother now appealed against the temporary lifting of the stay on the father’s proceedings which followed her application. The judge ordered for the . .
The mother sought the return of her children to France. Her summons had been dismissed after balancing the policy of the Convention against the strength of the child’s objection to return together with certain welfare considerations. The . .
A lesbian couple had split up and disputed the care of the children. An order had been made but then, in breach of that order, one removed the children overnight to Cornwall. An argument was made that the court had failed to give proper weight to . .
The father sought to have registered here, a French order for parental contact. The mother had brought the child to England with the consent of the court, and then obtained an apparently conflicting order here.
Held: There was a conflict . .
The mother had unlawfully and against the father’s wishes, brought the child to the UK from the US. She hid their identity and whereabouts for a year, and resisted the father’s request for his return to the US, saying the child was settled here.
The appellant was the mother of a child, who was claiming asylum. The father sought the return of the child to India, claiming he had been abducted by the mother. She said that whilst her claim for asylum was extant, the court must not allow her or . .
It was possible for the court itself to have sufficient rights of custody under the Convention to allow a party to apply on the basis that an abduction had interfered with those rights of custody. A father had begun proceedings but did not himself . .
Three young children had been brought to England from Israel by their mother but without the consent of the father, who now sought their return. The mother claimed that the father had subsequently acquiesced in the removal. Both parents were . .
The father appealed against rejection of his claim for the return of his three children to New Zealand. . .
A summary order for the return of an abducted child is not appropriate where there had been some considerable and unexplained delay in the making of the application for the return of the child. . .
The family had moved to Australia from England. Within weeks the father moved out of the house at the mother’s suggestion. The father took the child to England on 10 July. Johnson J had held at first instance that by 21 May the family were . .
The court delivered a judgment settling the extent of the court’s power to remove a child subject to an abduction application into Local Authority accommodation as an interim measure. . .
The mother of a child sought return of her son to Australia. The child was born in New Zealand, then came to England and the family then went to Australia. The father brought him back to England by subterfuge. He now denied the child had any . .
The test of whether a return of an abducted child will risk grave physical or psychological harm is a strict one, not to be affected too much by considerations of sibling children who are not subject to the Convention against Child Abduction. . .
A child appealed an order for him to be returned to Croatia to be with his father. The mother had returned to England believing this to be her home.
Held: In such cases where the court might make an order under the 1989 Act for residence with . .
The father had applied for a summary order requiring the return of the daughter to Israel. . .
The court considered what would constitute a child being ‘settled’ under the 1985 Act: ‘I now turn to the last matter, which is art. 12, as to whether in these circumstances it has been demonstrated that Katharine in now settled in her new . .
The English mother married the Australian father in Australia and bore their child their. After divorce both parents had custody with no right to remove the child. The mother brought the child to England without the father’s consent.
Held: The . .
The mother fled Pakistan and secured asylum here, proving a well founded fear of persecution if she returned. She had brought her son. The father applied for the child to be returned for the courts there to decide his future, saying he had been . .
Order returning child is final order, and any appeal is to the Court of Appeal not to the Family Division. . .
Where children had clearly been unlawfully removed to live in this country, the distress necessarily occasioned by another move against the mother’s wishes was unlikely to prevent an order for their return to the country from which they had been . .
A six year old boy, had lived in Western Australia all his life. Shortly prior to his removal from Australia, the mother had left Australia to live in Wales. The maternal grandmother asked the father for permission to take the child to Wales to . .
The court considered the degree of settlement that had to be proved under the Act: ‘The second question which has arisen is: what is the degree of settlement which has to be demonstrated? There is some force, I find, in the argument that legal . .
The mother had applied here for asylum. Her application had been refused but was subject to appeal. The father in India sought the return of the children on the basis that they had been removed from a Convention country which was their habitual . .
The mother had persistently made false allegations against her husband of abduction and of forgery. She had been permitted to withdraw her originating application. She appealed an order against her for costs, saying that the Convention under which . .
Where a child of eleven years, but of greater maturity, made a compelling, reasoned and clear case for not being returned to one parent after an international abduction, the court could, with great care, refuse to order her return. Where two . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Application under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 for an order pursuant to Art 12 of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (hereafter the 1980 Convention) directing the summary return of Ruby Margaret . .
Application under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 and the Hague Convention 1980 for the return of the parties’ daughter, X to Spain. . .
Application for summary return of child to Ireland The Honourable Mr Justice Macdonald  EWHC 1439 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children Updated: 16 January 2022; Ref: scu.663804
The Honourable Mr Justice Macdonald  EWHC 1019 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, 1908 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction England and Wales Children Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.639747
The Hague Convention did not apply to wrongful acts of removal which had taken place before the 1985 Act came into force.Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘plainly the Act and Convention can only apply if the child is found in a different State from that in which it was habitually resident’ Lord Donaldson MR Independent 20 … Continue reading In re H (Minors): CA 20 Aug 1990
Hayden J said: ‘In assessing whether a child has lost a pre-existing habitual residence and gained a new one, the court must weigh up the degree of connection which the child had with the state in which he resided before the move.’ Hayden J  EWHC 2174 (Fam),  4 WLR 156,  WLR(D) 471 … Continue reading Re B (A Minor : Habitual Residence): FD 24 Aug 2016
Sir Mark Potter, the President of the Family Division  EWHC 3074 (Fam),  1 FLR 1229,  Fam Law 328 Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (B2R) England and Wales Children Updated: 12 December 2021; Ref: scu.381753
Mr David Rees QC  EWHC 3257 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children Updated: 12 December 2021; Ref: scu.657623
Gupta QC HHJ  EWHC 3138 (Fam) Bailii Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 England and Wales Children, International Updated: 11 December 2021; Ref: scu.657635