A and B (Children: Return order: Article 13(a) defence: 1980 Hague Convention), Re
[2024] EWHC 2473 (Fam)
B v C & Anor
18 April 2024
[2024] EWFC 138 (B)
Family Court
A baby born in Hungary moved to England with parents. Both England and Hungary wanted to decide the baby's future. The English judge decided that, even though the baby was technically living in England, it would be better for Hungary to handle things because they already knew the family well and could do it in everyone's native language.
Key Facts
- •Child A, born in Hungary on February 19, 2023, is the subject of care proceedings.
- •Mother C has paranoid schizophrenia and a low-average range of cognitive functioning.
- •Father D is also involved, and there are concerns about both parents' parenting skills and the child's welfare.
- •The family initially lived in Hungary, where child protection proceedings were initiated.
- •The family then moved to England in September 2023.
- •English local authority initiated care proceedings in December 2023.
- •The Hungarian authorities terminated their involvement due to the family's move to England.
Legal Principles
Habitual residence is the key determinant of jurisdiction under Article 5 of the Hague Convention 1996.
Article 5, Hague Convention 1996
Jurisdiction under the Hague Convention can be lost if the child ceases to be habitually resident in the jurisdiction.
London Borough of Hackney v P & Ors [2003] EWCA Civ 1213
Habitual residence requires a degree of integration in a social and family environment.
Warrington Borough Council v T, R, W and K [2021] EWFC 68; Re A (Area of Freedom, Security and Justice) (C-532/01) [2009] 2 FLR 1
A court may request a transfer of jurisdiction to another Contracting State if it considers that authority better placed to assess the child's best interests.
Article 8, Hague Convention 1996
When deciding on a transfer, the court considers the child's best interests, including the short and long-term impacts of the transfer itself.
N (Children) [2016] UKSC 15
Outcomes
The court finds that the child is habitually resident in England and Wales for the purposes of Article 5 of the Hague Convention 1996.
The Hungarian authorities terminated their involvement; the parents did not attempt to return the child to Hungary; the parents receive benefits in England.
The court requests the Hungarian authorities to assume jurisdiction.
The Hungarian authorities are better placed to assess the child's best interests due to their prior involvement, available evidence, and the ability to conduct proceedings in the parents' native language.