Permission to remove and abduction

?
  • Created by: tunds
  • Created on: 05-06-17 15:28
R v D [1984]
kidnapping occurs even if you're a parent of the child so long as you didn't get consent from those with PR for child
1 of 30
parental responsibility relates to all rights, responsibilities and duties that a parent has over a child
S3(1) CA 1989
2 of 30
What should a parent do if they fear their child might be taken abroad imminently?
If the parent has PR - Port Alert
3 of 30
Courts believed the welfare of the child was the paramount consideration.
Poel v Poel [1970]
4 of 30
Courts decided to take into account the impact on the child of the mother's attitudes and behaviour if she were not allowed to go
Nash v Nash [1973]
5 of 30
Nash v Nash approach was confirmed in...
Payne v Payne [2001]
6 of 30
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 AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010]
7 of 30
Black LJ criticised the approach in Re AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010] in...
K v K (Children: Permanent Removal from Jurisdiction) [2011]
8 of 30
Munby LJ criticised approach in Re AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010] in...
Re F (A child) [2012]
9 of 30
In which case was the Washington Declaration on International Family Relocation used?
Re AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010]
10 of 30
What should a parent do if they fear their child might be taken abroad soon but not imminently?
They should apply for a s8 prohibited steps order or if it is feared the child will be taken to a non-convention country they should get wardship from the HC.
11 of 30
What is the principle in J-S (A Child) (Contact: PR) [2002]?
It is extremely rare for courts to refuse PR.
12 of 30
Mostyn J was in what removal application case?
Re AR (A child) (Relocation) [2010]
13 of 30
What Act incorporates the Hague Convention 1980 in Civil Aspects on International Child Abduction?
The Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
14 of 30
Re M (Minors) (Residence order: Jurisdiction) (1993)
Habitual residence must be decided on a case by case basis.
15 of 30
What do you need to show for the Hague Convention to work?
Habitual residence and wrongful removal.
16 of 30
R F (A minor) [1992]
This case states the importance of habitual residence for the successful operation of the Convention.
17 of 30
B v H (Habitual residence: Wardship) [2002]
Bangladeshi Holiday, where the mother did not consent to permanently moving to Bangladesh and therefore her habitual residence remained in England, which meant her baby, born in Bangladesh, also had habitual residence in England.
18 of 30
Re H; Re S (Abduction: Custody rights) (1991)
Removal is from where the child is habitually resident and not from the care of the parent.
19 of 30
B (A child) [2016]
Discusses at what point a child's habitual residence changes.
20 of 30
Re J (A minor)
The child lost habitual residence after a day in the new country because of the parent's settled intention not to return.
21 of 30
A v A [2014]
Lord Wilson referred to this case in B (A Child) [2016], stating that a parent's intention was one relevant factor in deciding when habitual residence changes but the child's level of integration is
22 of 30
B v B [1993]
Proof of an intolerable situation does not "oblige the court to decline to order the return" of the child, it just provides a discretion. Highlights that the child's welfare is not the paramount consideration, but the return of the child.
23 of 30
Re F (Children) (Return Order Appeal) [2016]
A child's mental health was the reason why the child was not returned under Art 13(b) of the Convention.
24 of 30
S v S [1992]
A Child's welfare is not paramount consideration in abduction but if Art 13 is pleaded it may be considered.
25 of 30
Re A (Minors) (Acquiescence) [1992]
It provides a discretion where the person consented or acquiesced to the removal.
26 of 30
Article 13 (a)
It provides a discretion where the person consented or acquiesced to the removal.
27 of 30
Article 13 (b)
Judges have a discretion where there is a grave risk of harm or an intolerable situation.
28 of 30
Article 12
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.
29 of 30
How can you not gain PR as a father?
Unmarried fathers
30 of 30

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

parental responsibility relates to all rights, responsibilities and duties that a parent has over a child

Back

S3(1) CA 1989

Card 3

Front

What should a parent do if they fear their child might be taken abroad imminently?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

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

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Courts decided to take into account the impact on the child of the mother's attitudes and behaviour if she were not allowed to go

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Law in relation to Children resources »