Rights of Custody - Art. 3|Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)|Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a)|Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)|Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)|Human Rights - Art. 20|Issues Relating to Return
Order
Return refused
Article(s)
313(1)(a)13(1)(b)13(2)2012(2)
Ruling
Return refused. The father did not have rights of custody within the meaning of Article 3.
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)|Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)
Order
Return ordered
Article(s)
13(1)(b)13(2)
Ruling
Return ordered. No grave risk of harm was established and even if there had been one, protective measures were sufficient to ameliorate the risk. Though the child objected, discretion should be exercised so as to override this objection.
Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)|Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
Order
Return ordered
Article(s)
13(1)(b)12(2)
Ruling
Return ordered. The child was not settled in the UK, within the meaning of Article 12(2), nor was there a grave risk of harm to the child on return to Portugal within the meaning of Article 13(1)(b).
Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12|Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)|Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)|Jurisdiction Issues - Art. 16|Best Interests of the Child
Note that the mother later appealed this decision, arguing that the judge was wrong to dismiss the Article 13(1)(a) acquiescence and Article 13(1)(b) exceptions to return. The appeal was dismissed and the decision upheld. See case: Re B (1980 Hague Convention: Article 13(a)/(b)), [2025] EWCA Civ 1603, INCADAT ID1671.