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
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
View all articles
Authors

ABDUCTION: Re M (Abduction) [2007] EWCA Civ 260

Sep 29, 2018, 16:32 PM
Slug : re-m-abduction-2007-ewca-civ-260
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 27, 2007, 06:01 AM
Article ID : 85331

(Court of Appeal; Sir Mark Potter P, Rix and Wilson LJJ; 27 March 2007)

The British mother acknowledged that she had wrongfully removed the child from Serbia, where she and the child had been living separately from the child's Serbian father, but argued that a return would expose the 7 year old child to a grave risk of harm or put her in an intolerable situation, and also raised in defence the child's objections to a return. Although there was credible independent evidence that there had been significant harassment of the mother in Serbia, including several episodes of planting drugs on the mother and arranging police visits to the mother's home, the judge concluded that the defence under Art 13(b) of the Hague Convention (the Convention) had not been made out, and that the child ought to be returned on the basis of undertakings. The CAFCASS officer had reported that the child was a troubled and anxious child who feared for her mother's safety in Serbia, and feared that she would be separated from the mother, but the judge did not address directly the issue of the child's objections.

Allowing the mother's appeal, the President held that the judge had been wrong not to consider the child's objections, which were strong, and exceptional in the sense of the unusual circumstances underlying them, namely a campaign by someone bent upon planting drugs upon the mother in an effort not simply to harass her but to secure her arrest, prosecution and imprisonment. These were unusual and exceptional circumstances and the emergent welfare considerations, when balanced against the Convention considerations, were strongly in favour of a refusal to make an order for return, notwithstanding the fact that the mother had removed the child during concurrent custody proceedings in Serbia. Given the solid foundation for the child's objection to being returned, there was no need to reconsider the judge's rejection of the defence under Art 13(b).

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