LGL v MC

LGL v MC

None of the defences of consent, acquiescence, or grave risk under Article 13(b) were established; the mother did not consent to or acquiesce in the removal or retention; there is no evidence of grave risk or intolerable situation in Ecuador; summary return is mandated by the Hague Convention.

Parties
Applicant: LGL; Respondent: MC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction (hague Convention) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; summary return ordered.
Legal Topics
Hague Convention 1980, Summary Return, Consent, Acquiescence, Article 13(b), Protective Measures
Family Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Summary Return Consent Acquiescence Article 13(b) Protective Measures

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LGL

Applicant

MC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction (hague Convention) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the mother consented to or acquiesced in the removal and retention of the children in England
  2. 2 Whether the children's return to Ecuador would expose them to grave risk of harm or intolerable situation under Article 13(b)

Ratio Decidendi

None of the defences of consent, acquiescence, or grave risk under Article 13(b) were established; the mother did not consent to or acquiesce in the removal or retention; there is no evidence of grave risk or intolerable situation in Ecuador; summary return is mandated by the Hague Convention.

Court Disposition

Application granted; summary return ordered.

Orders

  • The children are to be returned forthwith to Ecuador.
  • Financial and practical arrangements for the return are to be considered separately.