Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles

ABDUCTION: K v K [2009] EWHC 2721 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:33 PM
Slug : k-v-k-2009-ewhc-2721-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 11, 2009, 12:20 PM
Article ID : 88279

(Family Division; Sir Christopher Sumner; 30 October 2009)

The Polish parents were living in Ireland, where the father had obtained work. Some weeks after the couple had moved into separate accommodation the father took the children, who had been living with the mother, to Poland. The mother contacted the authorities about the abduction, but before proceedings were issued the father and children returned to Ireland. Some months later the mother took the two children to England, on the basis, she claimed, of the father's consent.The father started Hague proceedings, but, before these were served, the mother came back to Ireland with the children. After a couple of weeks the mother went back to England with the children. The father issued Hague proceedings; the mother alleged that the father had consented to the initial move to England, and that her subsequent return to Ireland had merely been a holiday.

Under the Hague Convention, where a parent returned with the children for the purpose of an agreed holiday to the country from which they had been removed after a consensual departure, that did not, by itself, bring the earlier consent to an end. It might come to an end for other reasons, but there would have to be a clear indication from the mother, for instance, saying that she was no longer relying on the earlier consent or that her return was permanent, or actions on her part incompatible with any other interpretation. On the facts, the father had consented to the original move to England, and the subsequent return to Ireland had merely been for a holiday.

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