Latest articles
UK Immigration Rough Sleeper Rule
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsThe UK government has recently introduced a controversial new set of rules that aim to make rough sleeping grounds for refusal or cancellation of a migrant’s...
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
View all articles

CHILD ABDUCT: Re J (Child Returned Abroad: Convention Rights) [2005] UKHL 40

Sep 29, 2018, 17:35 PM
Slug : re-j-child-returned-abroad-convention-rights-2005-ukhl-40
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 10, 2005, 07:28 AM
Article ID : 88497

(House of Lords; Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Brown of Eaton-Under-Heywood; 16 June 2005) [2005] 2 FLR 802

Where there is a genuine issue as to whether the child should live here or elsewhere, it is relevant whether that issue is capable of being tried in the courts of the country to which the child may be returned. If it is not, then the court here must ask whether it is in the child's interests for the case to be heard here. There is no extension of Convention concepts to non-Convention States, rather the welfare of the child is crucial and it is for the trial judge to focus on the individual child in the particular circumstances of the case. Here the trial judge was wrong to not take into account the lack of jurisdiction in the home country to enable the mother to bring the child back without the father's consent.

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