CJ v KJ
AJ was habitually resident in the United States at the relevant time, but the father consented to and acquiesced in AJ’s retention in Wales. The mother established grave risk only if she could not remain in the United States during proceedings. Given the time elapsed, AJ’s settlement in Wales, and the nature of the defences proved, the court exercised its discretion not to order AJ’s return.
- Parties
- Applicant: CJ; Respondent: KJ
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 21 December 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Family / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for summary return of AJ to the United States refused.
- Legal Topics
- Hague Convention, Habitual Residence, Consent, Acquiescence, Grave Risk, Child Custody
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
CJ
Applicant
KJ
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Family / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Was AJ habitually resident in the United States at the time of alleged wrongful retention?
- 2 Did the father consent to or acquiesce in AJ's retention in Wales?
- 3 Would AJ's return to the United States expose her to grave risk of harm?
Ratio Decidendi
AJ was habitually resident in the United States at the relevant time, but the father consented to and acquiesced in AJ’s retention in Wales. The mother established grave risk only if she could not remain in the United States during proceedings. Given the time elapsed, AJ’s settlement in Wales, and the nature of the defences proved, the court exercised its discretion not to order AJ’s return.
Court Disposition
Application for summary return of AJ to the United States refused.
Orders
- No order for AJ’s return to the United States.
- Mother and AJ to remain in Wales.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment