A And B (Children: Brussels II Revised: Article 15) V
2014
FAMILY DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
- MRS JUSTICE PAUFFLEY
Areas of Law
- Family Law
- Conflict of Laws
- Human Rights Law
2014
FAMILY DIVISION
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case concerns whether jurisdiction over two Czech children under care proceedings in the UK should be transferred to the Czech Republic. The UK court, after considering the family's background and the children's welfare, decided to transfer jurisdiction to the Czech courts, determining that the children had a 'particular connection' to the Czech Republic and that it was in their best interests to have the case handled there.
Judgment
This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.
Mrs Justice Pauffley :
Issue
An urgent decision is required as to whether to request the district court in [specified town], Czech Republic to assume jurisdiction in relation to two Czech children, A who is almost 5 and B, just over 1 year old. Since April 2014, the children have been subject to care proceedings. The application for a transfer request is made by the father of the older child, fully supported by the mother but opposed by both the local authority and the Children’s Guardian, Carol Vicarage.
Essential background
The background is as follows. The mother and her family is “well known” to the Department for Social Care and Protection of Children (OSPOD) in the Czech Republic. There was agency involvement between 1998 and 2011. She lived with her grandmother, A’s great-grandmother – W – during his infancy.
In May 2011, OSPOD was about to initiate court proceedings when the mother’s family – but not W – fled to the UK.
In March 2012, the mother and X, A’s father, separated. She travelled to the Czech Republic with A but returned here in August that year by which time she was in a relationship with Y, who is B’s father.
In early 2013, the family came to the attention of the local authority because of reports of serious domestic violence between the maternal grandparents in the home where the mother and both children were living. In addition, there was reported violence as between the mother and Y.
At the initial child protection case conference in August 2013, A and B became the subject of child protection plans under the category of emotional abuse. It is suggested there had also been a level of general neglect.
In about January this year, Z and the mother separated. He may have returned to the Czech Republic having applied for an emergency passport to facilitate travel. His current whereabouts are unknown.
By March 2014, a pre-proceedings family assessment had concluded that significant concerns remained about the mother’s ability to keep the children safe, in pa