Re R (A Child) (Wrongful Retention: Child’s Objections: Discretionary Return)

Re R (A Child) (Wrongful Retention: Child’s Objections: Discretionary Return)

The court found that the Article 13(b) grave risk exception was not established, as the evidence did not show that R would face a grave risk of harm or intolerable situation if returned to Portugal. The court accepted that R's views amounted to an objection under Article 13(2) and that he had sufficient maturity, but concluded that, on balance, the policy considerations in favour of return, R's educational and social circumstances, and the need for any relocation to be determined by the Portuguese courts outweighed R's objections. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to order R's return to Portugal.

Parties
Applicant: V; Respondent: C
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; order for return of the child to Portugal.
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Hague Convention 1980, Wrongful Retention, Child's Objections, Grave Risk Exception, International Jurisdiction, Parental Responsibility
Family Law International Law Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Wrongful Retention Child's Objections Grave Risk Exception International Jurisdiction +1 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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

V

Applicant

C

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Hague Convention Child Abduction Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child R should be returned to Portugal under the 1980 Hague Convention following wrongful retention by the mother in England
  2. 2 Whether the Article 13(b) 'grave risk' exception applies
  3. 3 Whether the Article 13(2) 'child's objections' exception applies and, if so, how discretion should be exercised

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Article 13(b) grave risk exception was not established, as the evidence did not show that R would face a grave risk of harm or intolerable situation if returned to Portugal. The court accepted that R's views amounted to an objection under Article 13(2) and that he had sufficient maturity, but concluded that, on balance, the policy considerations in favour of return, R's educational and social circumstances, and the need for any relocation to be determined by the Portuguese courts outweighed R's objections. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion to order R's return to Portugal.

Court Disposition

Application granted; order for return of the child to Portugal.

Orders

  • R to be returned to Portugal within days, accompanied by the mother if she is willing.
  • The father to fund the cost of the mother's flight for the return.