C v M

C v M

The mother failed to establish that the return of the children to Mauritius would expose them to a grave risk of harm or otherwise place them in an intolerable situation, given the protective measures offered by the father. Although X objected to return and her views were considered authentic, her objections were not strong and were closely aligned with her views about her father rather than Mauritius itself. The Convention's policy considerations and the sufficiency of protective measures justified the order for return.

Parties
Applicant: C; Respondent: M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Children to be returned to Mauritius
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Hague Convention 1980, Protective Measures, Child's Objections, Grave Risk of Harm
Family Law International Law Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Protective Measures Child's Objections Grave Risk of Harm

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C

Applicant

M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children should be returned to Mauritius under the 1980 Hague Convention
  2. 2 Whether the Article 13(1)(b) defence of grave risk of harm or intolerability is established
  3. 3 Whether the child's objections under Article 13(2) should prevent return

Ratio Decidendi

The mother failed to establish that the return of the children to Mauritius would expose them to a grave risk of harm or otherwise place them in an intolerable situation, given the protective measures offered by the father. Although X objected to return and her views were considered authentic, her objections were not strong and were closely aligned with her views about her father rather than Mauritius itself. The Convention's policy considerations and the sufficiency of protective measures justified the order for return.

Court Disposition

Children to be returned to Mauritius

Orders

  • Children to be returned to Mauritius on a date to be agreed or determined by the court
  • Protective measures to be in place prior to return, including advance payment of six months' maintenance (£400 per month), health insurance, enforceable undertakings via exequatur, and arrangements for accommodation rental