J v G [2015] NICA 23 (27 March 2015)

J v G [2015] NICA 23 (27 March 2015)

The trial judge was entitled, on the evidence, to find that the child was at grave risk of physical or psychological harm or of being placed in an intolerable situation if returned to Canada, and that the undertakings offered by the father were not reliable given his history of addiction and behaviour. The appellate court will not interfere with the exercise of discretion where the law was properly applied and the findings of fact were open to the judge.

Citation
[2015] NICA 23
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: J; Defendant/respondent: G
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
27 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family Law Child Abduction) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Family Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
International Child Abduction, Hague Convention 1980, Article 13(b) Exception, Grave Risk of Harm, Protective Undertakings, Appellate Review
Family Law International Law International Child Abduction Hague Convention 1980 Article 13(b) Exception Grave Risk of Harm Protective Undertakings Appellate Review

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J

Plaintiff/appellant

G

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Law Child Abduction) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Family Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the return of the child to Canada would expose the child to grave risk of physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation under Article 13(b) of the Hague Convention
  2. 2 Whether the undertakings offered by the father were sufficient to mitigate any such risk

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled, on the evidence, to find that the child was at grave risk of physical or psychological harm or of being placed in an intolerable situation if returned to Canada, and that the undertakings offered by the father were not reliable given his history of addiction and behaviour. The appellate court will not interfere with the exercise of discretion where the law was properly applied and the findings of fact were open to the judge.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by J is dismissed; the order refusing the return of the child to Canada stands.