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
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...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
Lockdown 2: how does it affect child contact?
No sooner had clarity been obtained as to how child contact would work within and across the tier system, than the government announced its suspension in England.  From 5 November 2020, a 4-week...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
New Cafcass guidance on working with children during COVID-19
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published guidance on working with children during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The guidance sets out arrangements for...
View all articles
Authors

Re E (Abduction: Article 13B Deferred Return Order) [2019] EWHC 256 (Fam)

Feb 27, 2019, 15:33 PM
Abduction – Art 13(b), Hague Convention 1980 – Application for return order – Possibility of deferred return order
The father’s application for a return order was refused and the Art 13(b) defence under the Hague Convention 1980 had been made out.
Slug :
Meta Title : Re E (Abduction: Article 13B Deferred Return Order) [2019] EWHC 256 (Fam)
Meta Keywords : Abduction – Art 13(b), Hague Convention 1980 – Application for return order – Possibility of deferred return order
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 27, 2019, 00:00 AM
Article ID :

(Family Division, Knowles J, 13 February 2019)

Abduction – Art 13(b), Hague Convention 1980 – Application for return order – Possibility of deferred return order

The father’s application for a return order was refused and the Art 13(b) defence under the Hague Convention 1980 had been made out.

 


 

For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important Family Division, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and European courts case, subscribe to Family Law Reports.

Subscribers can log in here.

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of the Family Law Reports. Please quote: 100482.

 


 

Neutral Citation Number: [2019] EWHC 256 (Fam)

Case No: FD18P00220

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 13/2/2019

Before:

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE KNOWLES

Re E (Abduction: Article 13B Deferred Return Order)

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

Mr James Turner QC (instructed by Dawson Cornwall) for the father, RM
Mr Christopher Hames QC and Mr Mark Jarman (instructed by Venters) for the mother, EP
Mr Michael Edwards (instructed by CAFCASS Legal) for the child, EM

Miss Victoria Green (instructed by the local authority) for the local authority.

Hearing dates: 21-25 January 2019

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

Approved Judgment

I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.

.............................

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE GWYNNETH KNOWLES

This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.

 

 

Judgment: Re E (Abduction: Article 13B Deferred Return Order) [2019] EWHC 256

 

 

Categories :
  • Abduction
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from