Buscador de jurisprudencia

The mother was a Czech national who moved to the UK in 2004. The father was a British national. They met in England and had a brief relationship between 2009 and 2010, during which the child was born. The child was 13 years of age at the time of the hearing and had both English and Czech nationality.

There was a long history of acrimony and litigation between the parents.

In 2017, a court order granted the mother permission to relocate to the Czech Republic with the child. Since then the child had lived in the Czech Republic with her mother, her two half siblings and her stepfather.

In 2023, the parties arranged for the child to spend time in the UK on holiday with her father and his wife between 10 and 20 July. On 15 July the father contacted the mother stating that he would not be returning the child as she wished to remain living with him and wanted to attend school in England.

The mother contacted the Czech Central Authority and filed an application under the 1980 Hague Abduction Convention for the return of the child to the Czech Republic. The father also contacted the police in respect of the child’s disclosure that her stepfather had hit her and her half-siblings.

Return ordered. Whilst the child objected to the return and was of an age and degree of maturity at which it was appropriate to take her views into account, the Court exercised its discretion to order a return. 

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

The child’s assertions that she was treated differently from her half-siblings simply fell within the ambit of normal parenting and did not amount to a grave risk within the meaning of Article 13(1)(b). In any event there were protective measures including family and individual therapy for the child that could be put in place to ameliorate any risk.

Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)

The Court agreed that the child expressed an objection rather than a preference to returning to the Czech Republic. The child also had an age and degree of maturity at which it was appropriate to take her views into account.

The Court then considered whether to exercise the discretion to return, looking at the aims of the 1980 Convention and other relevant welfare factors, such as the importance of her relationship with her siblings and wider Czech family.

The Court decided to exercise that discretion and a summary return was ordered.