D v O

D v O

The English court retains exclusive jurisdiction under Brussels II Revised as the Polish non-return order was based on Article 13 of the Hague Convention. The procedural requirements of Article 42 Brussels II Revised are satisfied: both the child and the mother had opportunity to be heard, and the reasons for the Polish non-return order were considered. The Guardian's evidence supports that J's long-term welfare is best served by return to England, where proper welfare-based decisions can be made. The father's undertakings sufficiently protect J pending further proceedings. Summary return is ordered to facilitate a full welfare inquiry in England.

Parties
Applicant Father: D; Respondent Mother: O; Respondent Child: J
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Article 11(7) Brussels II Revised Application / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Summary return of J to England ordered under Article 11(7) Brussels II Revised
Legal Topics
Summary Return of Child, Jurisdiction Under Brussels II Revised, Hague Convention Article 13, Child Welfare, Parental Responsibility, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
Family Law International Child Abduction Children Law Summary Return of Child Jurisdiction Under Brussels II Revised Hague Convention Article 13 Child Welfare Parental Responsibility +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D

Applicant Father

O

Respondent Mother

J

Respondent Child

Procedural Posture

Article 11(7) Brussels II Revised Application / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court retains jurisdiction under Brussels II Revised after Polish non-return order
  2. 2 Whether summary return of the child to England is in her best interests
  3. 3 Whether procedural requirements under Article 42 Brussels II Revised are satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The English court retains exclusive jurisdiction under Brussels II Revised as the Polish non-return order was based on Article 13 of the Hague Convention. The procedural requirements of Article 42 Brussels II Revised are satisfied: both the child and the mother had opportunity to be heard, and the reasons for the Polish non-return order were considered. The Guardian's evidence supports that J's long-term welfare is best served by return to England, where proper welfare-based decisions can be made. The father's undertakings sufficiently protect J pending further proceedings. Summary return is ordered to facilitate a full welfare inquiry in England.

Court Disposition

Summary return of J to England ordered under Article 11(7) Brussels II Revised

Orders

  • J to be returned to England forthwith, preferably in the care of her mother; alternatively, in the care of a suitable carer if mother refuses
  • Father to provide undertakings as set out in his statement, including no contact, payment of flights, maintenance, and accommodation