Samira Addou v Sidali Bannabi

Samira Addou v Sidali Bannabi

The respondent is in contempt of court for failing to comply with three specific orders to return the child to England and Wales. He was properly served, aware of the proceedings, and has chosen not to participate. Sequestration is justified as previous measures, including freezing bank accounts, have been ineffective.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Samira Addou; Respondent: Sidali Bannabi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Family / Judgment
Outcome
sequestration order granted
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Sequestration, Contempt of Court, Jurisdiction
Family Law Child Abduction Sequestration Contempt of Court Jurisdiction

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samira Addou

Applicant

Sidali Bannabi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is in contempt of court for failing to return the child to England and Wales as ordered
  2. 2 Whether sequestration is an appropriate remedy for continued breach of court orders

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent is in contempt of court for failing to comply with three specific orders to return the child to England and Wales. He was properly served, aware of the proceedings, and has chosen not to participate. Sequestration is justified as previous measures, including freezing bank accounts, have been ineffective.

Court Disposition

sequestration order granted

Orders

  • Sequestration order made against the respondent's property
  • Respondent may apply to set aside or vary the order