Permission to remove and abduction

Get Revising

Created by: tunds
Created on: 05-06-17 15:28

1. Courts believed the welfare of the child was the paramount consideration.

Payne v Payne [2001]
Poel v Poel [1970]
Nash v Nash [1973]
Re AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010]

1 of 20

2. Re J (A minor)

Removal is from where the child is habitually resident and not from the care of the parent.
Habitual residence is a question of fact and can be complex.
The child lost habitual residence after a day in the new country because of the parent's settled intention not to return.
Discusses at what point a child's habitual residence changes.

3. Article 13 (a)

If the application under the Hague convention is made outside of 12 months then judges do not have to order the return of the child.
It provides a discretion where the person consented or acquiesced to the removal.
Judges have a discretion where there is a grave risk of harm or an intolerable situation.
This section explains wrongful removal.

4. Guidance to deciding whether removal should be allowed - is application genuine? is it realistic? What are the reasons of the opposing parent? impact on mother? etc

Re F (A child) [2012]
Re AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010]
K v K (Children: Permanent Removal from Jurisdiction) [2011]
Re D (A child) [2010]

5. Mostyn J was in what removal application case?

Re AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010]
Re F (A child) [2012]
Re W (Children) (Relocation: Permission) [2010]
Re D (A child) [2010]

View more questions

Comments

jackstones09

Report Mon 5th June, 2023 @ 10:15

If you are looking for a game that will make you laugh, scream, and cheer, look no further than Stumble Guys, a party knockout game for up to 32 players online. Stumble Guys is a game that lets you compete with other players in a series of hilarious and chaotic obstacle courses.