Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal set aside a Hague return order by consent after the father withdrew his summons, and the children’s appeal was withdrawn without deciding the merits.
M v F (No2)(Implementation of Return Order) [2026] EWHC 324 (Fam) (19 January 2026)
The High Court held that pending asylum claims did not bar the mother from removing the children to Brazil under an existing Hague Convention return order.
M v F (Art 13 Thresholds Not Met) [2025] EWHC 2629 (Fam) (17 October 2025)
Hague Convention child abduction case: the court ordered Y and Z returned to Brazil, rejecting Art 13 objections and grave-risk arguments.
The Court of Protection retains jurisdiction to make limited orders to locate AB, a vulnerable adult, following her wrongful removal to Jamaica, and it is proportionate to stay proceedings pending further application, given AB’s welfare has been ascertained and the applicant is pursuing remedies in Jamaica.
Source excerpt
The High Court approved a consent order returning two children to France to reunite with their parents, finding reunification best served their welfare despite residual risk.
The High Court held that post-Brexit immigration law no longer bars implementing a child return order before asylum claims are decided, if non-refoulement is respected.
K (Children) (Application for return orders: Concurrent asylum claims) [2025] EWHC 450 (Fam) (28 February 2025)
The High Court held that, under the current domestic framework, it may implement a child return order before asylum claims are determined, if non-refoulement is respected.
The court held it retained jurisdiction over a child wrongfully removed to Northern Cyprus, dismissed the Children Act proceedings, and stayed the wardship proceedings.
The Court of Appeal dismissed a father’s appeal against committal for contempt after finding he could comply with an order to return his child from Algeria.
The English court does not have jurisdiction to order the return of C under the 1996 Hague Convention or Family Law Act 1986 as C was habitually resident in Pakistan at the time of the application. The threshold for exercising the inherent jurisdiction based on nationality is not met because there is no evidence of risk or peril to C in Pakistan, the applicant delayed seeking relief, and Pakistan is the appropriate forum. Any order would be futile as enforcement is unlikely. Proceedings in England are therefore dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
