A (a child), Re

A (a child), Re

The English court, having been validly seised under BIIR Article 10, retains jurisdiction to determine parental responsibility, including contact, after a Hague non-return order by a French court. However, only an order requiring the child to live in England would amount to a 'judgment requiring return' under BIIR Article 11(8). Orders for contact or shared residence involving temporary stays do not trigger continued English jurisdiction. The child's welfare requires that he remain living with his mother in France, with supervised contact in England. A shared residence order is inappropriate as it does not reflect the reality of the child's life and may create jurisdictional confusion....

Parties
Applicant: HA; First Respondent: MB; Second Respondent: A (a child, by his guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Children Act 1989 Section 8 Application (residence, Contact, Specific Issue Orders) and BIIR Article 11(7) Application / Final Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Residence order in favour of the mother; contact order in favour of the father; application for return of the child to England refused.
Legal Topics
Brussels II Revised Regulation (biir), Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980, Jurisdiction in Child Abduction Cases, Parental Responsibility, Residence and Contact Orders, Shared Residence, Habitual Residence, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
Family Law International Child Abduction Private International Law Brussels II Revised Regulation (biir) Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 Jurisdiction in Child Abduction Cases Parental Responsibility Residence and Contact Orders +3 more

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HA

Applicant

MB

First Respondent

A (a child, by his guardian)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Children Act 1989 Section 8 Application (residence, Contact, Specific Issue Orders) and BIIR Article 11(7) Application / Final Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Scope and effect of Article 11(7) BIIR applications after a Hague non-return order
  2. 2 Jurisdiction of English courts under BIIR Article 10 in child abduction cases
  3. 3 Whether contact or shared residence orders amount to a 'judgment requiring return' under BIIR Article 11(8)

Ratio Decidendi

The English court, having been validly seised under BIIR Article 10, retains jurisdiction to determine parental responsibility, including contact, after a Hague non-return order by a French court. However, only an order requiring the child to live in England would amount to a 'judgment requiring return' under BIIR Article 11(8). Orders for contact or shared residence involving temporary stays do not trigger continued English jurisdiction. The child's welfare requires that he remain living with his mother in France, with supervised contact in England. A shared residence order is inappropriate as it does not reflect the reality of the child's life and may create jurisdictional confusion....

Court Disposition

Residence order in favour of the mother; contact order in favour of the father; application for return of the child to England refused.

Orders

  • A to remain living with the mother in France (residence order in her favour)
  • Contact order: A to have supervised contact with the father in England every six weeks, with gradual extension during a week-long visit in August, subject to the father meeting half the costs and depositing his passport during contact