FB v MG

FB v MG

The father failed to prove S was habitually resident in Israel at the relevant date; S was habitually resident in England, integrated in family and social life there, and in the primary care of his mother whose habitual residence was England. The claim for summary return under Article 3 of the Hague Convention fails.

Parties
Applicant: FB; Respondent: MG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction Summary Return Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence, Hague Convention 1980, Summary Return, Wrongful Retention, Acquiescence, Grave Risk Exception
Family Law International Child Abduction Habitual Residence Hague Convention 1980 Summary Return Wrongful Retention Acquiescence Grave Risk Exception

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FB

Applicant

MG

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction Summary Return Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was S habitually resident in Israel at the relevant date?
  2. 2 Was there wrongful retention under Article 3 of the Hague Convention?
  3. 3 Has the father acquiesced to S's retention in England (Article 13(a))?

Ratio Decidendi

The father failed to prove S was habitually resident in Israel at the relevant date; S was habitually resident in England, integrated in family and social life there, and in the primary care of his mother whose habitual residence was England. The claim for summary return under Article 3 of the Hague Convention fails.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for summary return refused
  • No order as to acquiescence or Article 13(b) exception due to finding on habitual residence