AB v CD & Ors

AB v CD & Ors

The court found that both children were habitually resident in Egypt at the time of the applications, that the English court had jurisdiction under FLA 1986 s.2(1)(b) (matrimonial proceedings jurisdiction), but that the father had not shown Egypt to be a clearly more appropriate forum. The welfare of the children, particularly the risk of unnecessary disruption to O if moved again, required that no summary return order be made for either child. The matter should proceed to a full welfare hearing with both children remaining where they are pending final determination.

Parties
Applicant: AB; 1st Respondent: CD; 2nd and 3rd Respondents: O and P (through their Guardian, Lillian Odze)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Family Cross Applications for Summary Return of Children / Judgment After Summary Hearing, Directions for Full Welfare Hearing
Outcome
No summary return order made for either child; directions for full welfare hearing on relocation and child arrangements.
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Habitual Residence, Jurisdiction, Forum Conveniens, Welfare of the Child, Summary Return, Parental Responsibility, International Relocation
Family Law Private International Law Child Abduction Habitual Residence Jurisdiction Forum Conveniens Welfare of the Child Summary Return +2 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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Applicant

CD

1st Respondent

O and P (through their Guardian, Lillian Odze)

2nd and 3rd Respondents

Procedural Posture

Family Cross Applications for Summary Return of Children / Judgment After Summary Hearing, Directions for Full Welfare Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children were habitually resident in England or Egypt at the time of the applications
  2. 2 Whether the English court has jurisdiction to make return orders under the Family Law Act 1986 and/or Hague Convention 1996
  3. 3 Whether summary return orders should be made for either child

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both children were habitually resident in Egypt at the time of the applications, that the English court had jurisdiction under FLA 1986 s.2(1)(b) (matrimonial proceedings jurisdiction), but that the father had not shown Egypt to be a clearly more appropriate forum. The welfare of the children, particularly the risk of unnecessary disruption to O if moved again, required that no summary return order be made for either child. The matter should proceed to a full welfare hearing with both children remaining where they are pending final determination.

Court Disposition

No summary return order made for either child; directions for full welfare hearing on relocation and child arrangements.

Orders

  • No summary return of O to England or P to Egypt pending full hearing
  • Directions for statements from parents on proposals and arrangements