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
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
View all articles
Authors

Re A and B (Children : Restrictions on Parental Responsibility : Extremism and Radicalisation in Private Law) [2016] EWFC 40

Sep 29, 2018, 18:34 PM
Private law children – Radicalisation – Child arrangements orders – Allegations of violence and radicalisation
Orders were made for the children to remain living with the mother and to have no contact with the father whom the mother alleged was violent and had been radicalised.
Slug : re-a-and-b-children-restrictions-on-parental-responsibility-extremism-and-radicalisation-in-private-law-2016-ewfc-40
Meta Title : Re A and B (Children : Restrictions on Parental Responsibility : Extremism and Radicalisation in Private Law) [2016] EWFC 40
Meta Keywords : Private law children – Radicalisation – Child arrangements orders – Allegations of violence and radicalisation
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 3, 2016, 04:17 AM
Article ID : 112867

(Family Division, Russell J, 22 July 2016)

Private law children – Radicalisation – Child arrangements orders – Allegations of violence and radicalisation

Orders were made for the children to remain living with the mother and to have no contact with the father whom the mother alleged was violent and had been radicalised.

The two children, now aged 2 and 3, had dual British and Arabic heritage. They were born in England and had always lived with the British mother. The mother and children had fled the family home due to domestic violence and now lived in a refuge. The father was currently serving a prison sentence for breach of protective orders and he was subject to a deportation order.

The mother applied for child arrangements orders specifying that the children were to live with the mother and have no contact with the father, a specific issue order for the children to be known by alternative names and a s 91(14) order preventing the father from making further applications to the court. The guardian supported the mother’s applications.

A fact-finding hearing was convened to address allegations that the father had been violent towards the mother and that he had been radicalised by ISIS/Daesh and that that might present an additional threat to the children in the future.

The mother’s case on the issue of domestic violence was made out. However, the allegations of radicalisation were not made out. They were vague, generalised and there was no evidence he was involved with, or actively supported Daesh (or Islamic State), had openly espoused their dogma or aims or that he had encouraged others to do so. Radicalisation was a sensitive subject and there must be no suggestion that the courts would accept or tolerate any suggestion that adherents of the Islamic Faith, or any other faith, were, ipso facto, supporters of extremism.

The father had been repeatedly violent, threatening and dominated every aspect of the mother’s life before she left him, and that he had deliberately set out to intimidate and control her, using his religion, and hers, to justify and normalise his brutal and aggressive behaviour.

The court made the orders sought.

Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWFC 40

Case No: BS15P00888

IN THE FAMILY COURT AT BRISTOL
(Sitting in the BRISTOL MAGISTRATES COURT)
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT 1989
IN THE MATTER OF A (A Child) (Born on 18th October 2012) and B (A Child) (Born on 2nd May 2014)


Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL


Date: 22/07/2016


Before:


MS JUSTICE RUSSELL
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:


 F 
Applicant


 and 


 M 
1st Respondent


 and 


A & B (Children by their guardian)
2nd & 3rd Respondents
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


 Miss Elizabeth Isaacs QC (instructed by Andrea Davies at DS Legal) for the Applicant
Ms Sarah Morgan QC and Mr Richard Jones (instructed by Rebecca Stevens at Withy King LLP) for the 1st Respondent
Ms Tanya Zabihi (instructed by Sheldan Price at Watkins Solicitors) for the 2nd and 3rd Respondents


Hearing dates: 13th to 24th June 2016


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Judgment
Re A and B [2016] EWFC 40.rtf
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Private Law Children
Tags :
FLR
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from