C v M (A Child) (Abduction: Representation of Child Party)

C v M (A Child) (Abduction: Representation of Child Party)

The judge was entitled to rely on the evidence of the solicitor-guardian as no objection was raised below, the evidence was admissible, and the judge properly exercised her discretion in refusing a return order based on the child's objections and Article 13(b). The grounds of appeal raised new points not argued below and were without merit.

Parties
Appellant: C (Father); First Respondent: M (Mother); Second Respondent: X (Child); First Intervener: Association of Lawyers for Children; Second Intervener: Reunite International Child Abduction Centre
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family Law Child Abduction) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Hague Convention 1980, Child's Objections, Role of Solicitor Guardian, Article 13(b) Defence, Discretion Under Hague Convention
Family Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Child's Objections Role of Solicitor Guardian Article 13(b) Defence Discretion Under Hague Convention

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C (Father)

Appellant

M (Mother)

First Respondent

X (Child)

Second Respondent

Association of Lawyers for Children

First Intervener

Reunite International Child Abduction Centre

Second Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Law Child Abduction) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in relying on the evidence of the solicitor-guardian (Ms Broadley)
  2. 2 Whether there was a procedural irregularity in refusing an adjournment for further Cafcass evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge gave disproportionate weight to the child's objections

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to rely on the evidence of the solicitor-guardian as no objection was raised below, the evidence was admissible, and the judge properly exercised her discretion in refusing a return order based on the child's objections and Article 13(b). The grounds of appeal raised new points not argued below and were without merit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed. No return order is made under the 1980 Hague Convention.