ES v DS

ES v DS

The children are settled in the UK within the meaning of Article 12, and there is a grave risk that return would expose them to psychological harm or intolerable situation due to the history of domestic abuse, the Mother's mental health, and the Father's inability to control his emotions. Protective measures offered are inadequate. The court declines to exercise discretion to order return.

Parties
Applicant: ES; Respondent: DC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Hague Convention 1980, Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, Summary Return of Children, Settlement Defence, Grave Risk Defence, Child's Objections
Family Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 Summary Return of Children Settlement Defence Grave Risk Defence Child's Objections

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ES

Applicant

DC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children are settled in the UK within the meaning of Article 12 of the Hague Convention
  2. 2 Whether the child Y objects to return and has sufficient maturity under Article 13
  3. 3 Whether there is a grave risk that return would expose the children to harm or intolerable situation under Article 13(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The children are settled in the UK within the meaning of Article 12, and there is a grave risk that return would expose them to psychological harm or intolerable situation due to the history of domestic abuse, the Mother's mental health, and the Father's inability to control his emotions. Protective measures offered are inadequate. The court declines to exercise discretion to order return.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed