S (A Child)

S (A Child)

The judge was entitled to find, on the facts, that the child was habitually resident in England at the time of removal, despite the short period of residence and retention of the Belgian home. The correct legal test was applied, and the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Mr. S (Father); Respondent: Ms. S (Mother)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence, Hague Convention 1980, Brussels II Revised, Child Removal, Consent and Acquiescence
Family Law International Child Abduction Habitual Residence Hague Convention 1980 Brussels II Revised Child Removal Consent and Acquiescence

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. S (Father)

Appellant

Ms. S (Mother)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child was habitually resident in England at the time of removal to Belgium
  2. 2 Whether the mother consented or acquiesced to the removal
  3. 3 Whether the judge correctly applied the law on habitual residence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find, on the facts, that the child was habitually resident in England at the time of removal, despite the short period of residence and retention of the Belgian home. The correct legal test was applied, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; High Court decision affirmed