MB v SB

MB v SB

M did not acquire habitual residence in Israel because neither she nor her mother integrated into Israeli life; the move was ambiguous and exploratory, not a settled emigration. The child’s emotional, social, and family environment remained rooted in England, and the evidence did not support a sufficient degree of stability or integration in Israel to change habitual residence.

Parties
Father: MB; Mother: SB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction / Custody (habitual Residence Determination) / Judgment After Hearing on Habitual Residence and Return Application
Outcome
Application for return of M to Israel refused; M found habitually resident in England.
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence, Hague Convention 1980, Child Welfare, Parental Intent, Integration of Child, Inherent Jurisdiction
Family Law International Child Abduction Habitual Residence Hague Convention 1980 Child Welfare Parental Intent Integration of Child Inherent Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MB

Father

SB

Mother

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction / Custody (habitual Residence Determination) / Judgment After Hearing on Habitual Residence and Return Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Where is the child M habitually resident?
  2. 2 Should M be returned to Israel under the 1980 Hague Convention?
  3. 3 Is there a basis for the father's application under the inherent jurisdiction?

Ratio Decidendi

M did not acquire habitual residence in Israel because neither she nor her mother integrated into Israeli life; the move was ambiguous and exploratory, not a settled emigration. The child’s emotional, social, and family environment remained rooted in England, and the evidence did not support a sufficient degree of stability or integration in Israel to change habitual residence.

Court Disposition

Application for return of M to Israel refused; M found habitually resident in England.

Orders

  • M is not to be returned to Israel under the 1980 Hague Convention.
  • The father's application under the inherent jurisdiction is adjourned for further consideration.