TD v MT (Rights of Custody after Lawful Removal)

TD v MT (Rights of Custody after Lawful Removal)

There was no act of retention on 17 February 2025 for the purposes of Article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention. Even if there was, the father did not have attributed to him rights of custody at that date under South African law, as the relocation order had already been executed and its suspension did not revive his rights of custody. Therefore, any retention was not wrongful under the Convention.

Parties
Applicant: TD; Respondent: MT
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 (1980 Hague Convention) / Preliminary Issue; Summary Dismissal Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Rights of Custody, Wrongful Retention, Hague Convention, Summary Dismissal
Family Law International Child Abduction Rights of Custody Wrongful Retention Hague Convention Summary Dismissal

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TD

Applicant

MT

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 (1980 Hague Convention) / Preliminary Issue; Summary Dismissal Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an act of retention under Article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention
  2. 2 Whether the father had rights of custody at the relevant date under South African law
  3. 3 Whether any retention was wrongful for the purposes of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

There was no act of retention on 17 February 2025 for the purposes of Article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention. Even if there was, the father did not have attributed to him rights of custody at that date under South African law, as the relocation order had already been executed and its suspension did not revive his rights of custody. Therefore, any retention was not wrongful under the Convention.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Father’s application under the 1980 Hague Convention is dismissed