Skip to content

Socials

S v DE P (2008)

14th May 2008

Court

Family Division

Practice Areas

International Children Law

Summary

The interests and welfare of three children currently residing with their mother in the United Kingdom would be best served by allowing them to remain in the jurisdiction. Accordingly, the father’s application to have them returned to Argentina was refused.

Facts

The applicant father (F) applied for an order to require his ex-wife (M) to return the children (C) of their marriage to Argentina.

F and M had separated. At the time of the separation, both F and M lived in Argentina. By an agreement that was subsequently ratified by the Argentinean courts M was given sole custody of C. M later left Argentina to study in the United Kingdom. Initially, C were placed in the custody of F but, by a further agreement, C were allowed to come to the UK with M and live with her for one year. At the end of that year, M and C returned to Argentina. M applied to the Argentinean court for further permission to have C live with her in the UK and permission was granted for a further year. M and C remained in the UK even after the expiry of the one-year period envisaged by the Argentinean order and F brought the instant application. The issue for determination was whether C should be returned to Argentina for the purpose of enabling that state to make a decision as to their medium to long term welfare.

Held

C had expressed a real and compelling wish to remain in the UK. They had become committed to their schooling and their community and developed a circle of friends; they were clearly psychologically and physically settled in the UK. Ordering their return to Argentina would result in a considerable disruption to their education and life. On that basis, C’s medium to long term welfare needs would be best served by their remaining in the UK, M (Children) (Abduction: Rights of Custody), Re [2007] UKHL 55, [2008] 1 A.C. 1288 applied and D (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody), Re [2006] UKHL 51, [2007] 1 A.C. 619 considered.

Application refused

Permission

Lawtel Logo_lawtel20x50

What people say

Quote
Quote
Quote
The clerking team is the best there is. Nothing is too much trouble and no problem is insurmountable. They just make life easier at every turn.
Quote
Chambers and Partners, 2025
Quote
4PB is a set with top-class counsel at all levels in matrimonial finance work.
Quote
Legal 500, 2024
Quote
An immensely respected set recognised for its immeasurable expertise in private and public children law, as well as its complementary skill in matrimonial finance work.
Quote
Chambers and Partners, 2025
Quote
4PB is ‘a brilliant set across the board – top choice for children law matters.'
Quote
Legal 500, 2025