Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
View all articles

CONTEMPT: L County Council v MD and ID

Sep 29, 2018, 18:58 PM
Slug : contempt-l-county-council-v-md-and-id
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 8, 2014, 03:30 AM
Article ID : 104443

(Family Division, Hayden J, 6 December 2013)

The parents of six children had a volatile relationship characterised by domestic violence. The local authority found the parents unwilling to co-operate with their investigations and there were concerns for their engagement with health and educational services for the children.

The family fled to Ireland to escape professional involvement but during their stay there were reports of a domestic violence incident at the hotel they were staying at and the father was subsequently arrested on a European Arrest Warrant for outstanding DV incidents against his wife.

The mother returned to England where a child protection conference was convened and the children were registered under the category of neglect in circumstances where their whereabouts remained unknown. Since then three of the children, aged 15, 5 and 3 were flown to Pakistan. The matter was transferred to the High Court in order to locate and secure their return. Return orders had been made and penal notices attached but the children remained in Pakistan. Committal proceedings were initiated.

The judge had no hesitation in finding that the parents were in breach of the orders, and that, the father in particular knew the whereabouts of the children but refused to disclose it and that he was able to secure their return but refused to do so.

The father was in flagrant contempt of the court orders and had lied repeatedly. While it was clear from observing the mother that her autonomy had been systematically eroded by her husband's bullying dominance, she had continuously lied and failed to follow the advice of the local authority. She was, therefore, also beyond reasonable doubt in contempt of the orders. 


Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from