Vigreux v Michel & Anor

Vigreux v Michel & Anor

The trial judge erred in exercising discretion to refuse the child's return to France. The judge gave undue weight to the child's perception of the French process and to welfare considerations that should have been neutral or balanced. The policy of the Hague Convention, reinforced by Brussels II Revised, required return, especially as the French court was seised of all welfare issues and the abduction was flagrant. The judge's decision was therefore set aside and the appeal allowed.

Parties
Appellant: Joelle Vigreux; 1st Respondent: Patrick Jacques Robert Michel; 2nd Respondent: Pierre-Mathieu Bernard Rene Michel
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction / Family Law Appeal / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; order of non-return set aside
Legal Topics
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Brussels II Revised (council Regulation (ec) No 2201/2003), Parental Responsibility, Jurisdiction, Judicial Discretion, Child's Objections, Comity, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
Family Law International Law Child Abduction Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Brussels II Revised (council Regulation (ec) No 2201/2003) Parental Responsibility Jurisdiction Judicial Discretion +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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joelle Vigreux

Appellant

Patrick Jacques Robert Michel

1st Respondent

Pierre-Mathieu Bernard Rene Michel

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction / Family Law Appeal / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in exercising discretion to refuse return of the child under the Hague Convention and Brussels II Revised, despite the child's objections being made out
  2. 2 Whether the policy of the Hague Convention and Brussels II Revised required the return of the child to France
  3. 3 Whether welfare considerations and the child's perception of the French process were given undue weight

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in exercising discretion to refuse the child's return to France. The judge gave undue weight to the child's perception of the French process and to welfare considerations that should have been neutral or balanced. The policy of the Hague Convention, reinforced by Brussels II Revised, required return, especially as the French court was seised of all welfare issues and the abduction was flagrant. The judge's decision was therefore set aside and the appeal allowed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; order of non-return set aside

Orders

  • Set aside the order refusing return of the child to France
  • Order for the return of Pierre-Mathieu Bernard Rene Michel to France