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
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
The suspension, during lockdown, of prison visits for children: was it lawful?
Jake Richards, 9 Gough ChambersThis article argues that the suspension on prison visits during this period and the deficiency of measures to mitigate the impact of this on family life and to protect...
View all articles
Authors

ABDUCTION: Re B (Abduction: Grave Risk) [2005] EWHC 2988 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:36 PM
Slug : re-b-abduction-grave-risk-2005-ewhc-2988-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 31, 2006, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 88765

(Family Division; Sir Mark Potter P; 21 December 2005) [2006] 1 FLR 1095

The Australian court refused the English mother's application for leave to remove from the Australian jurisdiction, considering that a removal would damage the children's relationship with the father, and that the mother's psychological state was resilient enough to cope with the increased difficulties she would experience away from her family roots. The mother was awarded custody, with contact to the father on the basis of a requirement that the father not drink while with the children. On the mother's evidence the father breached that condition and the mother became increasingly depressed. Eventually, the mother wrongfully retained the children in England following a holiday. The mother's defence was that there was a grave risk to the children if they were ordered to return.

The court should not succumb to the temptation of a short cut solution. The proper solution was to return the children to Australia for the Australian court to reconsider the position on the mother's renewed application for leave to remove from the Australian jurisdiction. The Australian court should consider, among other issues, the mother's health, the father's non-payment of maintenance, and the father's apparent breach of the undertaking not to drink while the children were with him.

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