Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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...
Spotlight
Latest articles
The need for proportionality and the ‘Covid impact’
Simon Wilkinson, Parklane PlowdenThe Covid-19 pandemic has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. Within the courts and tribunals service there has been a plethora of guidance since March 2020 which...
Local authority input into private law proceedings, part II
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingsLucy Logan Green, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingThis article considers the interplay between private and public law proceedings, focusing on the law relating...
Time for change (II)
Lisa Parkinson, Family mediation trainer, co-founder and a Vice-President of the Family Mediators AssociationThe family law community needs to respond to the urgent call for change from the...
How Can I Wed Thee? – Let Me Change the Ways: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper on ‘Weddings’ Law (2020)
Professor Chris Barton, A Vice-President of the Family Mediators Association, Academic Door Tenant, Regent Chambers, Stoke-on-TrentThis article considers the Paper's 91 Consultation Questions...
Consultation on the proposed transfer of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of costs to the Legal Aid Agency
The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on the proposed transfer from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to the Legal Aid Agency of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of...
View all articles
Authors

FACT-FINDING HEARING: ML v KW and Another [2013] EWHC 341 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:01 PM
Slug : fact-finding-hearing-ml-v-kw-and-another-2013-ewhc-341-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 12, 2013, 06:19 AM
Article ID : 101823

(Family Division, Peter Jackson J, 22 February 2013)

The parents originated from Afghanistan and resided in the UK following their marriage. When the relationship broke down the father sought contact with the 2-year-old son which was opposed by the mother who made serious allegations of domestic violence against him and his family. She also alleged that the father took her and the child to Afghanistan where she was held against her will and subjected to violence by the father and his family. A fact-finding hearing took place in relation to the mother's allegations.

The mother's allegations of both sexual and physical violence were to be believed and were supported by medical evidence. The fact that the mother did not report the incidents contemporaneously was no reason for doubting them. The mother had been very dependent on the father and it was only with considerable support that she later received that she was able to discuss such personal matters.

It was clear that the treatment of the mother in Afghanistan was oppressive and that following a disturbance at the paternal family home the mother felt it necessary to seek refuge in a shelter for 2 ½ months. The mother's concerns were essentially genuine and were increased by the father's extensive lies during proceedings.

The serious events of the past would make it difficult for the child to enjoy important relationships with the father and wider family. If there was substantial acceptance of the court's findings then it might be possible to work towards some degree of reconciliation. The father in particular was urged to reflect on the position and accept responsibility for what had happened in order for progress to be made.

A residence order was made in favour of the mother in addition to protective orders. Matters were adjourned for submissions to be made on how contact proceedings should now progress.

 

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