AL v SM

AL v SM

NG is settled in England within the meaning of Article 12 of the Hague Convention, both physically and emotionally, and any concealment by the mother was at the lowest end of the spectrum. The evidence of settlement is clear and unequivocal, and even if the burden on the mother was high, it is met. The court declines to exercise its discretion to order return, as it would not be in NG's interests. Acquiescence is not established, and Article 13B (intolerability) does not apply.

Parties
Applicant: AL; Respondent: SM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Judgment on Application for Summary Return
Outcome
Application for summary return dismissed
Legal Topics
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Brussels II Regulation, Summary Return of Child, Settlement Exception, Discretion to Return, Acquiescence, Intolerability (article 13 B)
Family Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Brussels II Regulation Summary Return of Child Settlement Exception Discretion to Return Acquiescence +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AL

Applicant

SM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Judgment on Application for Summary Return

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child NG is settled in England within the meaning of Article 12 of the Hague Convention
  2. 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to order return if settlement is established
  3. 3 Whether the father acquiesced in the removal or retention of NG

Ratio Decidendi

NG is settled in England within the meaning of Article 12 of the Hague Convention, both physically and emotionally, and any concealment by the mother was at the lowest end of the spectrum. The evidence of settlement is clear and unequivocal, and even if the burden on the mother was high, it is met. The court declines to exercise its discretion to order return, as it would not be in NG's interests. Acquiescence is not established, and Article 13B (intolerability) does not apply.

Court Disposition

Application for summary return dismissed

Orders

  • No order for summary return of NG to Slovakia
  • Transcript of judgment to be prepared at public expense