JC v SS

JC v SS

The court found that the father had given clear and unequivocal consent to the children's permanent relocation to England, as evidenced by a signed written agreement and his conduct. He did not withdraw this consent prior to removal or retention. The mother reasonably relied on this consent. The court further found that the father acquiesced in the children's remaining in England. The children, each of sufficient age and maturity, expressed clear objections to return. There was also a grave risk that return would expose the children to harm due to the mother's mental health vulnerabilities and the history of domestic abuse, and the protective measures offered were insufficient....

Parties
Applicant: JC; Respondent: SS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Judgment After Summary Hearing
Outcome
Application for summary return refused
Legal Topics
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Consent and Acquiescence, Children's Objections, Grave Risk of Harm, Summary Return Applications
Family Law International Law Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Consent and Acquiescence Children's Objections Grave Risk of Harm Summary Return Applications

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JC

Applicant

SS

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Judgment After Summary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the removal or retention of the children was wrongful under the Hague Convention
  2. 2 Whether the father consented to or acquiesced in the children's removal or retention
  3. 3 Whether the children object to return and are of sufficient age and maturity

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the father had given clear and unequivocal consent to the children's permanent relocation to England, as evidenced by a signed written agreement and his conduct. He did not withdraw this consent prior to removal or retention. The mother reasonably relied on this consent. The court further found that the father acquiesced in the children's remaining in England. The children, each of sufficient age and maturity, expressed clear objections to return. There was also a grave risk that return would expose the children to harm due to the mother's mental health vulnerabilities and the history of domestic abuse, and the protective measures offered were insufficient....

Court Disposition

Application for summary return refused

Orders

  • Application for return of the children to the Republic of Ireland is refused on the grounds that wrongful removal/retention is not established, the children object to return, and Article 13(b) applies.