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
Help separated parents ditch avoidance strategies that stop them resolving differences
The desire to avoid conflict with an ex is the primary reason that separated parents do not get to see their children.  That’s an eye-opening finding from a survey of 1,105 separated...
What is a Cohabitation Agreement, and do I need one?
Many couples, despite living together, never seek to legally formalise their living and financial arrangements.  They mistakenly believe that the concept of a ‘common law’ husband and...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
View all articles
Authors

ABDUCTION: Re D (Article 13(B): Non-Return) [2005] EWHC 2920 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:38 PM
Slug : re-d-article-13-b-non-return-2005-ewhc-2920-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 15, 2005, 10:12 AM
Article ID : 89001

(Family Division; Macur J; 15 December 2005)

There had been a serious firearm assault on the English mother in the family home in Venezuela: she had been shot at close range receiving wounds to her face and right shoulder. The assailant claimed that he had been hired to shoot at the mother to frighten her. The mother suspected that the father had instigated the attack, but the father claimed that he had himself been attacked by unknown assailants for political reasons, and that the attack on the mother was probably similar in motive. The mother later removed the children to England, and the father sought the return of the children to Venezuela.

The judge found that there was a real risk of physical danger to the children in ordering a return to Venezuela, and that their psychological welfare would be put at risk if the mother returned pursuant to an order for the children's return. In this exceptional case, the court would exercise its discretion not to return the children. The judge made use of expert reports produced by experts providing therapy to the mother and children, distinguishing such use from the problematic use in Re B (Sexual Abuse: Experts Report) [2000] 1 FLR 871, and nonetheless being careful to take account only of the medical diagnosis and prognosis made upon facts sufficiently supported by the evidence, and not of any determination of the facts by the expert.

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