Esheria England and Wales Case Law
Sign in
England and Wales Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

England and Wales Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter England and Wales case law

Results update automatically as you type.

England and Wales decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family law

G v L (Return Order)

Neither the grave harm exception under Article 13(b) nor the child objection exception under Article 13 is established; protective measures offered by the mother and involvement of Italian social services are sufficient to address any risk, and D’s objections are not to Italy per se and he lacks the maturity required for his views to be determinative. The court exercises its discretion in favour of summary return to Italy.

Source excerpt

  • Hague convention
  • Child return order
  • Child objections
  • Grave risk exception
  • Protective measures
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] EWHC 1050 (Fam)

FG, Re (A Child: Return Order to Lithuania)

FG, Re (A Child: Return Order to Lithuania) [2026] EWHC 1050 (Fam) (01 May 2026)

Hague Convention return proceedings concerning a 6-year-old child. The court found Lithuania was the child’s habitual residence and ordered return.

  • Child abduction
  • Habitual residence
  • Wrongful removal
  • Return order
  • Hague convention
  • Custody rights
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] EWHC 731 (Fam)

D v M & Anor (Art 13(b) Alleged Murder of Parent)

D v M & Anor (Art 13(b) Alleged Murder of Parent) [2026] EWHC 731 (Fam) (01 April 2026)

Hague Convention return application dismissed after the court found a grave risk of psychological harm to the child and no workable protective measures.

  • Child abduction
  • Hague convention 1980
  • Grave risk exception
  • Protective measures
  • Summary return orders
  • Child-abduction
Read case analysis
Family law

N v N (Art 12 Settlement)

TN is settled in England and Wales for purposes of Article 12, and grave risk of harm under Article 13(b) is established due to domestic abuse allegations and lack of enforceable protective measures in Albania; discretion not exercised to order return.

Source excerpt

  • Hague convention 1980
  • Child settlement exception
  • Grave risk exception
  • Protective measures
  • Domestic abuse
  • Asylum claims
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] EWHC 21 (Fam)

EN v RN & Anor

EN v RN & Anor [2026] EWHC 21 (Fam) (15 January 2026)

The High Court refused a Hague Convention return order to Albania, finding the child was settled in England and Wales and that return would pose a grave risk of harm.

  • Child abduction
  • Hague convention 1980
  • Settlement exception
  • Grave risk exception
  • Asylum and immigration
  • Summary return orders
Read case analysis
Family law

C (A Child) (Abduction: Grave Risk: Asylum Claim: Child’s objections), Re

Article 13(b) grave risk exception is not satisfied; the court confidently discounts risk of intolerable situation for C upon return, especially given Ohio Family Court's welfare determination and proposed protective measures. C's objections are noted but carry limited weight due to age, maturity, and influence by mother. Discretion exercised in favour of return, subject to undertakings ensuring 'soft landing' and minimising risk of maternal incarceration or immediate separation.

Source excerpt

  • Hague convention 1980
  • Wrongful removal
  • Wrongful retention
  • Grave risk exception
  • Child's objections exception
  • Protective measures
Read case analysis
Family law

RS and TU (Children: Return Order to Zimbabwe), Re

The removal of the children from Zimbabwe was wrongful under Article 3 of the Hague Convention because both parents had rights of custody under Zimbabwean law and the father's consent was required for removal. The grave risk and child objection exceptions were not established to the requisite standard. Accordingly, a return order was made for the children to return to Zimbabwe.

Source excerpt

  • International child abduction
  • Hague convention 1980
  • Wrongful removal
  • Custody rights
  • Summary return
  • Child objections
Read case analysis
Family law [2025] EWHC 3461 (Fam)

C (A Child), Re (Abduction: Grave Risk: Asylum Claim: Child's Objections)

C (A Child), Re (Abduction: Grave Risk: Asylum Claim: Child's Objections) [2025] EWHC 3461 (Fam) (17 December 2025)

The High Court ordered C’s return to Ohio under the Hague Convention, rejecting grave risk and child objections arguments, with return protected by undertakings.

  • International child abduction
  • Hague convention
  • Wrongful removal
  • Wrongful retention
  • Grave risk exception
  • Child's objections
Read case analysis
Family law [2025] EWHC 3352 (Fam)

RS and TU (Children: Return Order to Zimbabwe), Re

RS and TU (Children: Return Order to Zimbabwe), Re [2025] EWHC 3352 (Fam) (17 December 2025)

The High Court ordered the return of two Zimbabwean children, finding their removal to the UK was wrongful under the Hague Convention and rejecting grave risk and child-objection defences.

  • International child abduction
  • Hague convention 1980
  • Wrongful removal
  • Return order
  • Child objections
  • Grave risk exception
Read case analysis
Family law

Y (Child Abduction; Habitual Residence; Grave Risk; Ukraine), Re

By November 2024, Y was habitually resident in England, so M’s retention was not wrongful under the Hague Convention. Even if wrongful retention were found, the grave risk exception under Article 13(b) is made out due to ongoing war and risk of harm in Chernihiv, and protective measures are insufficient. The application for summary return is refused.

Source excerpt

  • Habitual residence
  • Wrongful retention
  • Hague convention 1980
  • Grave risk exception
  • Child welfare
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

England and Wales decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.