M v F (Art 13 Thresholds Not Met)

M v F (Art 13 Thresholds Not Met)

Neither the child's objections nor grave risk of harm exceptions under Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention are established. Y's stated preferences do not amount to an objection with sufficient strength, conviction, or rationality, and are found to be the product of undue influence by the paternal family. Allegations of grave risk, including threats in Brazil and abuse, are unsubstantiated or confidently discounted. A summary return order is mandated. Interim protective orders are justified under Article 11 of the 1996 Hague Convention pending implementation, due to ongoing asylum appeals.

Parties
Applicant: M; First Respondent: F; Second Respondent: PA; Third Respondent: PG; Fourth and Fifth Respondents: Y and Z (Children by their Children’s Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction (hague Convention) Application / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Application allowed; summary return order granted.
Legal Topics
International Child Abduction, Hague Convention 1980, Child Custody, Summary Return Orders, Protective Measures, Children's Objections, Grave Risk Exception, Interim Jurisdiction, Asylum and Immigration Interface
Family Law International Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Child Custody Summary Return Orders Protective Measures Children's Objections +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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Applicant

F

First Respondent

PA

Second Respondent

PG

Third Respondent

Y and Z (Children by their Children’s Guardian)

Fourth and Fifth Respondents

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction (hague Convention) Application / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the exceptions under Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention (child's objections and grave risk of harm) are established to prevent summary return of children to Brazil
  2. 2 Whether interim protective measures are justified pending implementation of a return order due to ongoing asylum appeals

Ratio Decidendi

Neither the child's objections nor grave risk of harm exceptions under Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention are established. Y's stated preferences do not amount to an objection with sufficient strength, conviction, or rationality, and are found to be the product of undue influence by the paternal family. Allegations of grave risk, including threats in Brazil and abuse, are unsubstantiated or confidently discounted. A summary return order is mandated. Interim protective orders are justified under Article 11 of the 1996 Hague Convention pending implementation, due to ongoing asylum appeals.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; summary return order granted.

Orders

  • Summary return order under Article 12 of the 1980 Hague Convention for Y and Z to Brazil.
  • Paternal grandmother to confirm within 7 days whether she will withdraw protection (asylum) claims for the children and, if so, to confirm withdrawal.