E v W [2000] JRC 189 (25 September 2000)

E v W [2000] JRC 189 (25 September 2000)

The court held that, in the absence of Hague Convention applicability, the welfare of the child is paramount. Given the Belgian court's competent jurisdiction, the fabricated nature of the Defendant's allegations, and the appropriateness of Belgium as the forum, it is in the child's best interests to be returned to Belgium with the Plaintiff.

Citation
[2000] JRC 189
Parties
Plaintiff: E.; Defendant: Defendant
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
25 September 2000
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction/custody / Final Judgment/order
Outcome
Orders granted as sought by Plaintiff; child to be returned to Belgium with Plaintiff.
Legal Topics
International Child Abduction, Child Custody, Non Convention Countries, Welfare of the Child
Family Law International Law International Child Abduction Child Custody Non Convention Countries Welfare of the Child

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E.

Plaintiff

Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction/custody / Final Judgment/order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child N. should be returned to Belgium under an order of a foreign court when both countries are non-parties to the Hague Convention
  2. 2 What legal principles govern child abduction cases between non-Convention countries

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, in the absence of Hague Convention applicability, the welfare of the child is paramount. Given the Belgian court's competent jurisdiction, the fabricated nature of the Defendant's allegations, and the appropriateness of Belgium as the forum, it is in the child's best interests to be returned to Belgium with the Plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Orders granted as sought by Plaintiff; child to be returned to Belgium with Plaintiff.

Orders

  • The interim injunction restraining the Defendant from removing N. from the jurisdiction without further order is confirmed.
  • The Plaintiff is authorised to leave the jurisdiction with N. to return to Holland.