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 the law. The application to the immigration authorities did not amount to such a repudiatory retention, because although it was concealed from F, something had to be done to regularise the stay of the children once it was to last more than their six month visas permitted. F could not properly have objected to such regularisation, even if M feared that he might have tried.
His Honour Judge Clifford Bellamy
[2016] EWHC 3535 (Fam)
Bailii
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – In Re C (Children) CA 12-Jul-2017
F appealed against refusal of an order requiring M to return their two children to Australia. . .
At FD – Re C (Children) SC 14-Feb-2018
‘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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children, International
Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.654120