Spotlight
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...
Spotlight
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
Authors

ABDUCTION: M v F [2008] EWHC 984 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:28 PM
Slug : m-v-f-2008-ewhc-984-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 8, 2008, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 86701

(Family Division; Charles J; 8 April 2008)

The family lived in Tenerife. The mother had two children by different fathers. The mother alleged that the father of the youngest child had threatened and assaulted her; the father had been acquitted in Spanish criminal proceedings. In the course of Spanish family proceedings the court made an interim order forbidding the father from communicating with the mother, and gave custody to the mother, stating, however, that parental authority was to be shared. Two days later the mother obtained an order ex parte allowing her to 'go to England' with the child, on the basis that she and the child would return for the trial. The mother obtained written consent from the father of the child's elder sibling, but did not inform the father of the child that she was leaving the jurisdiction. The mother and the two children moved to England and did not take any further part in the Spanish proceedings. The father of the child was unaware of the Hague Convention, and did not issue Hague proceedings for over a year.

There had been an abduction in breach of the father's rights of custody: the injunction preventing the father from communicating with the mother had not had the effect of suspending his rights of custody; and not only had the Spanish court not authorised the child's removal from Spain to make a home in England without the father's consent, the mother had been aware that his consent was required. The mother had not established that the child had become settled under Art 12, having failed to produce any evidence as to her state of mind as to the security of her position in England. The court ordered the return of the child on a date and subject to conditions set by the Spanish court. If settlement had been established, the court would still have ordered the child's return, on the basis that Spain was the best forum for the dispute between the parents.

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