Legal guidance is needed before taking children to or from the UK:- Family Mediation Chesham

The information that was made available by Family Mediation Chesham, The verdicts that were handed down by the Court of Appeal led to the happy ending that the novel had promised for one of the mothers. The ruling of a lower court was overturned by the justices who heard the appeal. The ruling stated that the two children should be sent back to the United Kingdom, regardless of whether their mother could obtain a visa to re-enter the United States. The justices who heard the appeal made the decision to overturn the ruling.

The appeal that was filed with the family court ended up being the determining element in everything.

The appeal that was brought before the family court centred on the question whether or not two children, ages 5 and 3, should be allowed to return to their country of birth, the United Kingdom. This request was made by the children’s father in accordance with a Hague Convention Court application. The appeal was heard in the United Kingdom. The woman arrived to the idea that she and her children would be better off living in the United Kingdom after suffering a number of challenges inside her marriage. She relocated the children there against the wishes of the children’s father and in defiance of an order issued by a court in the United Kingdom. It is probable that the mother might have reconsidered her choice to take the children from the United Kingdom if she had been informed of how complicated the immigration challenges that she and the father were up against were.
Since of the fact that the children had dual citizenship, immigration was not a problem for them despite the fact that they were born in the United States but also had British citizenship as a consequence of their mother. This was possible because the children’s mother was a British citizen. The Pakistani father of the children was considered to be an illegal over-stayer in the United Kingdom, and if he decided to come to the United Kingdom to challenge court rulings or to see the children, he risked being prevented from entering the United States, which he had considered to be his home country since he was 12 years old. If he came to the United Kingdom to see the children, he also risked being prevented from entering the United States. It was extremely unlikely that the mother would be able to obtain a visa to travel back to the United States because she was a British citizen who had visited the United Kingdom on a temporary visa and married the father in the United States. Because of this, it was highly unlikely that the mother would be able to travel back to the United States.
Both of the parents were living in really difficult conditions. It was extremely unlikely that the mother would be granted a visa to travel back to the United States with her children even if the father “won” his application under the Hague Convention and the court ordered the return of the children to the United States so that the UK court could decide what was in the children’s best long-term interests. This was because it was highly unlikely that the mother would “win” his application under the Hague Convention. Due to the fact that the High Court had previously ruled in the father’s favour, the mother believed that she had no other option than to appeal the judgement that was made by the court.
As a result, the Court of Appeal was put in the difficult position of having to decide whether the children would be at a significant risk of being harmed if they were returned to the United Kingdom in accordance with The Hague Convention. This was a very difficult decision for the Court of Appeal to make. This line of reasoning was provided by the mother owing to the limited defences that may be employed to try to avoid a Hague Convention-mandated return. Specifically, the mother cited the fact that there are very few options available. Even though the mother was the one who had caused the situation that the family found themselves in and even though the decision of the Appeal Court made it difficult for the father to have contact with his children due to his uncertain immigration status in the UK, the Appeal Court came to the conclusion that the children could not be removed from the primary carer that they had been living with. This was the case despite the fact that the mother was the one who had caused the situation that the family found themselves in.
Although the family situation could appear to be unusual, as a child abduction solicitor, I am frequently needed to examine the mass migration issues that arise after a child has been taken out of or has entered the UK and present the best possible evidence on immigration status and attachment. Despite the fact that the family situation may show up to be unusual, I am frequently required to investigate the migrant problems that arise after a child has been taken out of or has entered the UK. This is the case despite the fact that the family circumstances can seem to be out of the ordinary. Because a person’s immigration status might be a decisive element in a legal matter, it is vital that this be carried out as soon as possible. This was the circumstance in the case at hand, since the children had developed a strong relationship to their mother in her capacity as their primary caregiver, which meant that they would be placing themselves in risk if they returned to the United States without her presence. Would you put yourself in harm’s way? The judgement handed down by the High Court, which was subsequently reversed by the Court of Appeal, is illustrative of the level of risk that was chosen to be taken. However, it is sad that there are no winners or losers in this family scenario because the father now has the same immigration issues and difficulty in being able to visit his children. This makes it impossible to determine who the winners or losers are in this situation.

Contact our Mediator at Croydon or call on 0208 719 0001

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.