CB v CB

The court found that K was wrongfully retained in England but, under Article 13, K objects to return and has sufficient maturity. Considering the welfare of the child and the strength of his objections, the court exercised its discretion to refuse return to Australia.

Parties: Applicant: CB; Respondent: CB; Child: K; Guardian: Mr. Bob McGavin
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 10 April 2013
Procedural Posture: Application Under Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 / Final Hearing
Outcome: Application for return dismissed
Legal Topics: Hague Convention, Child Custody, Habitual Residence, Objection to Return, Discretion Under Article 13

Family Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention Child Custody Habitual Residence Objection to Return Discretion Under Article 13

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 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Applicant

Respondent

Child

Mr. Bob McGavin

Guardian

Procedural Posture

Application Under Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 / Final Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the child K was wrongfully retained in England under Article 12 of the Hague Convention
2 Whether the defence under Article 13 (child's objection and maturity) is made out
3 Whether the court should exercise discretion to refuse return based on child's welfare

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for return dismissed

Orders

Parties to agree future arrangements for K’s residence and contact; failing agreement, Guardian to report and matter to be listed for further hearing in June; hearing to be cancelled upon filing of agreement