I and L (Children), Re (Rev1)

I and L (Children), Re (Rev1)

The children's welfare is best served by returning to South Africa, their habitual residence, with their mother and stepfather, in accordance with the parenting agreement. The father's concerns do not justify overriding the agreement or the children's wishes. Any further disputes should be adjudicated in South Africa.

Parties
Applicant: MW; Respondent: LD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Children Proceedings (wardship, Prohibited Steps Order) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Child Custody, Habitual Residence, Forum Shopping, Parenting Agreements, Jurisdiction Under Children Act 1989

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

Parties

MW

Applicant

LD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Children Proceedings (wardship, Prohibited Steps Order) / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the children should return to South Africa with their mother or remain in England
  2. 2 Whether the English court should exercise jurisdiction or defer to the South African court
  3. 3 Whether the father's concerns about the mother's care and arrangements justified retaining the children in England

Ratio Decidendi

The children's welfare is best served by returning to South Africa, their habitual residence, with their mother and stepfather, in accordance with the parenting agreement. The father's concerns do not justify overriding the agreement or the children's wishes. Any further disputes should be adjudicated in South Africa.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The mother is at liberty to return with the children to South Africa when it is safe to do so.
  • The children may travel on their existing passports.