Cases Archive

James Mulholland led by Richard Harrison KC of 1 Kings Bench Walk appeared before the President and a Judge of the Upper Tribunal in a successful application for a summary return of two children under the Hague Convention. The Court gave guidance on Hague abduction cases when a parent has made an asylum application.

Alex Aspinwall appeared on behalf of the respondent mother in proceedings brought pursuant to article 12 of the Hague Convention 1980 for summary return of a child to Slovakia. The mother opposed the application and relied on the defence set out in article 13(b) of the Convention.

Alex succeeded in establishing the grave risk of harm (limb one of the test) but the court found that sufficient protective measures existed in Slovakia to mitigate any risk to the mother and child.

Please see here for the judgment.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2019/3099.html

Jay Banerji represented the Mother in an important case on unknown causation where an infant had sustained a skull fracture. No findings were made against the parents, and the proceedings were dismissed.

Alex Aspinwall (for the father) and Robin Powell (for the mother) appeared in a fact-finding hearing concerning allegations of abuse made by the respondent mother. The mother raised 39 separate allegations to advance a case of controlling and coercive behaviour dating from the parties first meeting until separation. The court determined that it would only hear evidence in relation to 14 of those allegations. The father, in turn, alleged a pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour directed against him. He submitted that the children’s removal from the jurisdiction was part of a wider plan to freeze him out of their lives.

Evidence was given over the course of 4 days and counsel made submissions on (a) the proper approach to considering evidence of controlling and coercive behaviour in light of the decision in Re H-N & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 448, (b) the approach to Lucas directions following A, B and C [2021] EWCA Civ 451 and (c) the credibility of each party and weight to be given various pieces of evidence presented to the court.

Please see here for the judgment. The court’s findings are set out at [124]. 10 findings were made against the father.