The family had Nigerian nationality, but the father also had US nationality. After the split, M wanted to live with the children in Nigeria, and F wanted them with him in the US. On M’s visit to the UK from Nigeria with the children, the father began child abduction proceedings which had kept M and the two daughters in London. M conceded that the habitual residence had been in the US, but claimed acquiescence. The court found acquiescence, but even so ordered their return to the US for their courts to make final decisions. M appealed.
Held: M’s appeal succeeded, and the children could return to Nigeria with her. The judge had erred in applying a hierarchy to the tests applicable under the Convention, and as to the judge’s reliance on the adaptability of the children because of their young age, ‘the divergence of judicial opinion about this only serves to show that cases such as this one cannot be determined by a generalised approach and that, as Re M makes very clear, the individual circumstances of the particular child are what matter and must be examined and weighed in the balance when exercising a discretion under the Hague Convention as to whether to return a child. ‘
Wilson, Pitchford, Black LLJ
 EWCA Civ 128,  Fam Law 452,  1 FCR 363
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980
England and Wales
Cited – Piglowska v Piglowski HL 24-Jun-1999
No Presumption of House for both Parties
When looking to the needs of parties in a divorce, there is no presumption that both parties are to be left able to purchase alternative homes. The order of sub-clauses in the Act implies nothing as to their relative importance. Courts should be . .
Cited – RS v KS (Abduction: Wrongful Retention) FD 26-Jun-2009
In considering an international abduction of a four year old child by a parent Macur J said that disruption to the living arrangements of such a young child ‘would have more far reaching consequences and adverse impact than in the case of an older . .
Applied – Re M and another (Children) (Abduction; Rights of Custody) HL 5-Dec-2007
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 . .
Cited – in Re B (Appeal: Lack of Reasons) CA 2003
Thorpe LJ considered the standard requirfed of a judgment: ‘For my part, I would say that the essential test is: does the judgment sufficiently explain what the judge has found and what he has concluded as well as the process of reasoning by which . .
Cited – Cannon v Cannon CA 19-Oct-2004
The mother had brought the child to the UK wrongfully. She had hidden their identity for more than a year. Upon discovering her, the father came to England and began proceedings for the child’s return to the US.
Held: Because the child’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.429629