BD v BJ

BD v BJ

By late February 2023, B had become habitually resident in England due to the weakening of her ties to Canada and her integration into life in England. Therefore, the mother's retention of B was not wrongful under Article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention, and the father's application for summary return must fail.

Parties
Applicant: BD; Respondent: BJ
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Abduction / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence, Hague Convention 1980, Consent and Acquiescence, Summary Return Orders
Family Law International Child Abduction Habitual Residence Hague Convention 1980 Consent and Acquiescence Summary Return Orders

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BD

Applicant

BJ

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Abduction / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child B was habitually resident in Canada or England as of March 2023
  2. 2 Whether the mother's retention of B in England was wrongful under Article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention
  3. 3 Whether the father consented or acquiesced to B remaining in England

Ratio Decidendi

By late February 2023, B had become habitually resident in England due to the weakening of her ties to Canada and her integration into life in England. Therefore, the mother's retention of B was not wrongful under Article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention, and the father's application for summary return must fail.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Father's application for summary return of B to Canada is refused
  • No order as to costs or further directions given in this judgment