H v B (BIIa: Enforcement of Domestic Return Order)

H v B (BIIa: Enforcement of Domestic Return Order)

The English court is not required or permitted to decide whether enforcement of its return orders under Chapter III of Brussels IIa should proceed in Poland while Hague Convention proceedings are ongoing; that is a matter for the Polish court. However, given the child’s continued wrongful retention, the mother’s non-compliance, and the absence of changed circumstances, it is in the child’s best interests to grant a further return order under the inherent jurisdiction with a penal notice attached.

Parties
Applicant: H; First Respondent: B; Second Respondent: V (by his Children’s Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Family / Judgment on Enforcement of Domestic Return Order and Request for Further Return Order
Outcome
Further return order granted under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court with a penal notice attached; Annex II certificate to be provided to the applicant for enforcement under Brussels IIa.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Return Orders, Brussels Iia Regulation, 1980 Hague Convention, Jurisdiction, Parental Responsibility
Family Law International Child Abduction Enforcement of Return Orders Brussels Iia Regulation 1980 Hague Convention Jurisdiction Parental Responsibility

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H

Applicant

B

First Respondent

V (by his Children’s Guardian)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Judgment on Enforcement of Domestic Return Order and Request for Further Return Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court should permit enforcement of domestic return orders under Chapter III of Brussels IIa while Hague Convention proceedings are ongoing in Poland
  2. 2 Whether a further return order should be made under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court

Ratio Decidendi

The English court is not required or permitted to decide whether enforcement of its return orders under Chapter III of Brussels IIa should proceed in Poland while Hague Convention proceedings are ongoing; that is a matter for the Polish court. However, given the child’s continued wrongful retention, the mother’s non-compliance, and the absence of changed circumstances, it is in the child’s best interests to grant a further return order under the inherent jurisdiction with a penal notice attached.

Court Disposition

Further return order granted under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court with a penal notice attached; Annex II certificate to be provided to the applicant for enforcement under Brussels IIa.

Orders

  • A further return order for the return of V to England and Wales under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court
  • A penal notice attached to the return order