EW v KT

EW v KT

N was not habitually resident in Poland immediately before her removal on 8 December 2020; the evidence showed her life, integration, and stability were in England, and the period in Poland was temporary, rushed, and unsettled. Therefore, the father’s application under the Hague Convention fails.

Parties
Applicant: EW; Respondent: KT
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction Summary Return Application Under Hague Convention / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence, Summary Return, Hague Convention 1980, Child Custody
Family Law International Child Abduction Habitual Residence Summary Return Hague Convention 1980 Child Custody

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EW

Applicant

KT

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction Summary Return Application Under Hague Convention / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the child N habitually resident in Poland immediately prior to removal on 8 December 2020?
  2. 2 If so, does the Article 13(b) harm exception apply to prevent summary return?
  3. 3 Should the court exercise discretion against ordering summary return if Article 13(b) is engaged?

Ratio Decidendi

N was not habitually resident in Poland immediately before her removal on 8 December 2020; the evidence showed her life, integration, and stability were in England, and the period in Poland was temporary, rushed, and unsettled. Therefore, the father’s application under the Hague Convention fails.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed