Re W (Children : Abduction: Implementation of Return Order) V

The court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the father's application for directions to implement the return order because the operative return order is subject to a condition precedent (the mother being granted entry clearance to the USA), which has not been fulfilled. Without satisfaction of this condition, there is no extant order to implement or enforce, and thus no ancillary jurisdiction to compel the mother to apply for a visa or entry clearance.

Parties: Applicant Father: Mr Hames; Respondent Mother: Unnamed Mother
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 22 February 2019
Procedural Posture: Child Abduction (hague Convention) / Application for Directions to Implement Return Order
Outcome: Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics: Hague Convention 1980, Return Order Implementation, Jurisdiction, Immigration Issues, Undertakings, Condition Precedent

Family Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Return Order Implementation Jurisdiction Immigration Issues Undertakings Condition Precedent

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mr Hames

Applicant Father

Unnamed Mother

Respondent Mother

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction (hague Convention) / Application for Directions to Implement Return Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to order the mother to apply for a visa to facilitate the return of the children to the USA under the existing return order
2 Whether the return order is operational in the absence of the mother being granted entry clearance to the USA

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.