Re R (Minors)(Wardship: Jurisdiction): CA 1981

When considering tha return of a child to a foreign jurisdiction, the ‘so-called kidnapping’ of the child, or the order of a foreign court, were relevant considerations: ‘but the weight to be given to either of them must be measured in terms of the interests of the child, not in terms of penalising the ‘kidnapper’, or of comity, or any other abstraction. ‘Kidnapping’, like other kinds of unilateral action in relation to children, is to be strongly discouraged, but the discouragement must take the form of a swift, realistic and unsentimental assessment of the best interests of the child, leading, in proper cases, to the prompt return of the child to his or her own country, but not the sacrifice of the child’s welfare to some other principle of law.’


Lord Justice Ormrod


(1981) 2 FLR 416


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRe J (A Child), Re (Child returned abroad: Convention Rights); (Custody Rights: Jurisdiction) HL 16-Jun-2005
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.228371