Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Ms Martha Gray (instructed by Williscroft & Co) for the Applicant Ms Geraldine More O'Ferrall and Mr Harjot Singh (instructed by Twinwood Law Practice) for the First Respondent Ms Eva Holland (of Cafcass Legal) for the Second Respondent Hearing date: 26 March 2026 ____________________
ii) Immediately before S's retention he was habitually resident in the jurisdiction of the United States of America.
iii) Immediately before S's retention the father had rights of custody in respect of S and was exercising those rights of custody.
iv) In the circumstances, the retention by the maternal grandmother of S was wrongful for the purposes of Art 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention.
i) There is a grave risk that S's return to the jurisdiction of the United States would expose him to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place him in an intolerable situation pursuant to Art 13(b) of the 1980 Hague Convention.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.