DO & BO (Temprorary Relocation to China), Re

DO & BO (Temprorary Relocation to China), Re

The court found a moderate, not insignificant, risk that the mother would not return the children from China, that there were no effective safeguards to ensure their return, and that the consequences of retention would be devastating. The welfare of the children required refusal of permission for the holiday. There was insufficient basis to make a section 91(14) order at this stage.

Parties
Applicant: WO; First Respondent: RO; Second Respondent (child): DO; Third Respondent (child): BO
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Children Act 1989 Proceedings (private Law) / Judgment After Contested Hearing on Temporary Relocation and Child Arrangements
Outcome
Mother's application for permission to take the children to China refused; no section 91(14) order made; child arrangements order not endorsed pending further argument.
Legal Topics
Temporary Relocation of Children, Prohibited Steps Orders, Child Arrangements Orders, Section 91(14) Barring Orders, International Child Abduction Risk, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Orders
Family Law Child Law Temporary Relocation of Children Prohibited Steps Orders Child Arrangements Orders Section 91(14) Barring Orders International Child Abduction Risk Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WO

Applicant

RO

First Respondent

DO

Second Respondent (child)

BO

Third Respondent (child)

Procedural Posture

Children Act 1989 Proceedings (private Law) / Judgment After Contested Hearing on Temporary Relocation and Child Arrangements

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the mother should be granted permission to take the children to China for a holiday
  2. 2 Whether a section 91(14) order should be made to restrict further applications under the Children Act

Ratio Decidendi

The court found a moderate, not insignificant, risk that the mother would not return the children from China, that there were no effective safeguards to ensure their return, and that the consequences of retention would be devastating. The welfare of the children required refusal of permission for the holiday. There was insufficient basis to make a section 91(14) order at this stage.

Court Disposition

Mother's application for permission to take the children to China refused; no section 91(14) order made; child arrangements order not endorsed pending further argument.

Orders

  • Refusal of permission for temporary removal of children to China for holiday
  • No section 91(14) order restricting further applications