M v M (Refusal of FGM Order)

M v M (Refusal of FGM Order)

There was no evidence before the court to suggest that the children were currently at risk of female genital mutilation, as the alleged perpetrator was in Nigeria, the children were in the UK, there was no evidence of imminent travel or contact, and no deportation order was in place. Therefore, the application was dismissed for lack of evidence establishing a real and immediate risk.

Parties
Applicant: HM; Respondent: DM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order / Judgment on Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation, Protection Orders, Risk Assessment, Jurisdiction
Family Law Child Protection Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders Risk Assessment Jurisdiction

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HM

Applicant

DM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order / Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is sufficient evidence to establish a real and immediate risk of female genital mutilation to the applicant's children justifying the grant of a protection order

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence before the court to suggest that the children were currently at risk of female genital mutilation, as the alleged perpetrator was in Nigeria, the children were in the UK, there was no evidence of imminent travel or contact, and no deportation order was in place. Therefore, the application was dismissed for lack of evidence establishing a real and immediate risk.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for female genital mutilation protection order is dismissed