M., Re, (2007) 379 N.R. 96 (HL)

• Case Date: December 05, 2007
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2007), 379 N.R. 96 (HL)

M., Re (2007), 379 N.R. 96 (HL)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2008] N.R. TBEd. JL.008

In re M (FC) and another (FC) (Children) (FC)

([2007] UKHL 55)

Indexed As: M., Re

House of Lords

London, England

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

December 5, 2007.

Summary:

Two children were brought to England from Zimbabwe by their mother in breach of their father's custody rights. He commenced proceedings to have them returned to Zimbabwe under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The trial judge held that they should be returned. The mother appealed.

The Court of Appeal, in a decision reported [2007] EWCA Civ 992, dismissed the appeal. The mother appealed again.

The House of Lords allowed the appeal and dismissed the father's Hague Convention proceedings.

Family Law - Topic 1965

Custody and access - Child abduction legislation - Return order - Two children, ages 13 and 10, were brought to England from Zimbabwe by their mother in breach of their father's custody rights - The mother's asylum claim was refused, but the family remained in England because of a moratorium on the return of failed asylum seekers to Zimbabwe - More than two years after the children were removed, the father commenced proceedings to have them returned to Zimbabwe under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction - The trial judge held that they should be returned - The mother appealed - The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The mother appealed again - An issue arose as to whether the court had a discretion under the Convention to order the return of a settled child or whether their return had to be sought and ordered under some other jurisdiction - The House of Lords held that that art. 12 of the Convention envisages that a settled child might in certain circumstances be returned within the Convention procedures - However, the court allowed the appeal and dismissed the father's Hague Convention proceedings, noting in particular that these settled children no longer wanted to go back to Zimbabwe and there were uncertainties and volatilities of life in Zimbabwe.

Family Law - Topic 2162

Custody and access - Enforcement of orders - International conventions - [See Family Law - Topic 1965 ].

Cases Noticed:

J., Re, [2006] 1 A.C. 80; 338 N.R. 254; [2005] UKHL 40, refd to. [paras. 7, 38].

C., Re (Abduction: Settlement), [2005] 1 F.L.R. 127; [2004] EWHC 1245 (Fam.), refd to. [paras. 7, 20].

D., Re, [2007] 1 A.C. 619; 367 N.R. 330; [2006] UKHL 51, refd to. [para. 19].

State Central Authority v. Ayob (1997), F.L.C. 92-746 (Aust. Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 23].

State Central Authority v. C.R., [2005] Fam. C.A. 1050 (Aust. Fam. Ct.), refd to. [para. 23].

Director-General of the Community Services v. Apostolakis (1996), F.L.C. 92-718, refd to. [para. 23].

Director-General, Department of Families, Youth and Community Care v. Thorpe (1997), F.L.C. 92-785, refd to. [para. 23].

Director-General of the Community Services v. M. and C. (1998), F.L.C. 92-829, refd to. [para. 23].

Director-General of the Families, Youth and Community Care v. Moore (1999), F.L.C. 92-841, refd to. [para. 23].

Cannon v. Cannon, [2004] EWCA Civ 1330; [2005] 1 F.L.R. 169 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

S. (A Minor), Re (Abduction), [1991] 2 F.L.R. 1, refd to. [para. 25].

N. (Minors), Re (Abduction), [1991] 1 F.L.R. 413, refd to. [para. 25].

M., Re (Abduction: Acquiescence), [1996] 1 F.L.R. 315, refd to. [para. 25].

L., Re (Abduction: Pending Criminal Proceedings), [1999] 1 F.L.R. 433, refd to. [para. 25].

Soucie v. Soucie, [1995] S.C. 134 (Scot.), refd to. [para. 26].

P. v. B. (No. 2) (Child Abduction: Delay), [1999] 4 I.R. 185 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 26].

Secretary of State for Justice (as the New Zealand Central Authority on behalf of T.J.) v. H.J., [2006] N.Z.S.C. 97; SC 36/2006, refd to. [para. 26].

C., Re (Abduction: Settlement) (No. 2), [2005] 1 F.L.R. 938, refd to. [para. 27].

Zaffino v. Zaffino, [2005] EWCA Civ 1012; [2006] 1 F.L.R. 410 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

S. (A Minor), Re (Abduction: Custody Rights), [1992] Fam. 242, refd to. [para. 34].

Vigreux v. Michel, [2006] EWCA Civ 630; [2006] 2 F.L.R. 1180 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

Klentzeris v. Klentzeris, [2007] EWCA Civ 533 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

M., Re (Abduction: Child's Objections), [2007] EWCA Civ 260; [2007] 2 F.L.R. 72, refd to. [para. 36].

R. (Minors), Re (Wardship: Jurisdiction) (1981), 2 F.L.R. 416, refd to. [para. 38].

L. (Minors), Re (Wardship: Jurisdiction), [1974] 1 W.L.R. 250, refd to. [para. 41].

Statutes Noticed:

Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague Convention), 1980, art. 1 [para. 11]; art. 12 [para. 13]; art. 13 [para. 16]; art. 20 [para. 19].

Hague Convention - see Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Authors and Works Noticed:

Beaumont, Paul, and McEleavy, Peter, The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction (1999), p. 209 [para. 22].

Eekelaar, John, International Child Abduction by Parents (1982), 32 Univ. of Toronto L.J. 281, p. 314 [para. 22].

Lowe, Nigel, Everall, Mark and Nicholls, Michael, International Movement of Children: Law, Practice and Procedure (2004), para. 17.33 [para. 22].

Nygh, The international abduction of children, in Children on the Move, How to Implement their Right to Family Life (1996), p. 42 [para. 28].

Perez-Vera, Elisa, Explanatory Report (April 1981), paras. 16, 17 [para. 11]; 24, 25 [para. 12]; 106 [para. 13]; 113 [para. 30].

Counsel:

Henry Setright, Q.C., and Edward Devereux (Instructed by Dawson Cornwell), for the appellants;

Marcus Scott-Manderson, Q.C., and David Williams (Instructed by Reynolds Porter Chamberlain LLP), for the respondents;

Teertha Gupta (Instructed by Lawrence & Co), for the intervenors.

Agents:

[Not disclosed.]

This appeal was heard on November 21-22, 2007, by Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, of the House of Lords. The decision of the House was delivered on December 5, 2007, when the following opinions were filed:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill - see paragraph 1;

Lord Hope of Craighead - see paragraphs 2 to 5;

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry - see paragraphs 6 to 8;

Baroness Hale of Richmond - see paragraphs 9 to 58;

Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood - see paragraph 59.