![ZC24P00662 - [2025] EWHC 2691 (Fam)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_0FrGysm.png){kind=logo}
The Background
The Background
The Applicant was born in south London in 1979. The father was born in the west of England in 1988. They entered a relationship in 2018 and married in 2019. They moved to live in Dubai. H was born in Dubai in February 2020. The parents separated in August 2020. The father has parental responsibility for H. All three are British citizens. Shortly thereafter litigation before the Family Court sitting at Central London began and has not stopped.
From birth until November 2024 H resided in Dubai. She spent quite a lot of time in England on holiday.
The Respondent issued an application for divorce on 9 December 2020. He also made an ex parteChildren Act 1989 application which was granted by a Recorder and then set aside by consent before HHJ Wright on 16 December 2020. On 15 December 2020 the Applicant issued proceedings in Dubai for the return of H to her care. On 15 January 2021 jurisdiction in England and Wales was established at a hearing before DDJ Landes. Directions were made for interim arrangements. On 12 May 2021 there was a further hearing before the Family Court sitting at Central London where directions were made to determine the Applicant’s application for leave to relocate H from Dubai to England and Wales. This was opposed by the Respondent. Decree absolute was pronounced on 8 July 2021. In August 2021 the Applicant issued an application for financial remedies. In September 2021 HHJ Cox determined the financial and children matters were inextricably linked and the proceedings were allocated to HJJ Oliver. On 27 October 2021 HHJ Oliver adjourned the Applicant’s temporary application for leave to relocate to England to the final hearing. On 6 January 2022 the Applicant asked the court to enquire into a police complaint she had made against the Respondent. On 14 January 2022 the Respondent applied for an anti-suit injunction. He made a similar application in Dubai on 28 January 2022 seeking to end the Dubai based proceedings.
On 6 April 2022 a four day contested hearing took place before HHJ Oliver. On 31 May he handed down a reserved judgment refusing the Applicant’s application for H to relocate from Dubai to England. He confirmed the jurisdiction of the court of England and Wales and ordered there should be no applications for orders from the Dubai courts (other than mirror orders) without the leave of the High Court. On 8 September 2022 HHJ Oliver made an order making clear it was in H’s best interest to live in Dubai and ordered a shared care child arrangements order which required H to reside equally between her parents on a fortnightly pattern. He made other ancillary orders and made a final financial remedies order. An anti-suit injunction was made against future litigation in Dubai.
In his judgment HHJ Oliver found the father to be a largely credible witness but criticised him for his behaviours which were not child focused. HHJ Oliver drew attention to the mother’s tendency to fabricate stories. HHJ Oliver noted that the mother had applied for temporary leave to remove on the basis that she was coming to England for a job interview, and that this proved to be false. HHJ Oliver listed ‘concerns’ about the mother, her behaviour. This included:
the mother sending the father a message which said “This is the last time you’ll ever see your daughter” appending a picture of one of H’s pre- birth foetal scans;
Leaving H for eight weeks in England whilst pretending to the father that H was with her in Dubai;
Compounding the deception referred to at (ii) by “telling lies and constructing falsehoods by sending messages, for example, of H crying to him, which she had got from her sister”;
Being visible in recordings saying to H that the father “doesn’t want you”;
Unjustified attempts to prevent contact between H and the father.
HHJ Oliver concluded that the mother’s behaviour demonstrated: “trying whichever way she might to either stack the cards in her favour…..All of those to my mind were indications of her trying to create an image of him being a bad and poor father when I saw nothing in the evidence to that effect.” He also found that the mother’s motivation to relocate with H to England, was not genuine, but was rather the mother “trying to reduce the amount of contact that father has with H”. He also found the mother to have “no real plan for there to be good contact between H and her father, were H to come to England”.
The mother did not appeal this decision nor the findings made within it.
On 6 January 2023 there was a hearing before HHJ Talbot to determine cross-applications regarding the proper interpretation of HHJ Oliver’s order. On 14 February 2023 HHJ Oliver refused various applications, including one for interim permission for H to reside in England. Arbuthnot J refused M’s application for a stay and permission to appeal. There was then a series of further hearings before HHJ Oliver over the summer of 2023 dealing with holidays and nursery placements. On 28 December 2023 Henke J made a collection order in respect of H.
HHJ Jacklin KC then appears to have assumed responsibility for the proceedings from April 2024. Mr Basi relies on passages from observations made by HHJ Jacklin KC, as follows, which I add to the chronology. These are:
I am aware of many court interventions over the period since the September 2022 order.
In December 2022, the mother refused to hand over [H] in the United Arab Emirates, despite the fact that His Honour Judge Oliver had specifically required that in his order. The fathertherefore had to come to England to collect the child and then the mother refused to hand overthe passport and His Honour Judge Talbot made an order and had to add a penal notice to itbefore it was actually complied with. Early the next year the mother took [H] from the UAEwithout permission and refused to return her, and there have been other breaches. For example,at the end of last year Mrs Justice Henke [sic] was moved to make a collection order because, again,[H] was brought to this country and the mother refused to return her. That, in my view, was aserious escalation because it involved this poor little girl in being recovered by the police undera collection order because her mother had refused to return her. That is just a taste of what hasbeen going on.”
On 30 May 2024 there was an incident between the Applicant and the paternal grandmother. The Applicant made a report to the Dubai police reporting the grandmother for threatening and abusive behaviour. The Applicant then retained H following this incident. It is important to note in amongst the chronology that H was then prevented by having any direct contact with the Respondent by the Applicant until 27 November 2024. He had seventeen indirect video sessions with the Respondent during these months. The Respondent issued a C2 application in the Family Court sitting at Central London alleging H had been abducted by the Applicant and sought H’s immediate return. On 5 June 2024 HHJ Jacklin KC ordered H’s return from the Applicant’s care to her father’s. She varied HHJ Oliver’s order stating that H must live with the Respondent for the same period that the Applicant had retained her. Cusworth J refused the Applicant’s application for permission to appeal the 5 June 2024 order on 10 July 2024. The Applicant ignored the court’s orders.
On 15 July 2024 the Respondent issued an application in Dubai to enforce the earlier child arrangements order of HHJ Oliver and the 5 June 2024 order. This was granted on 18 July 2024. There continued to be proceedings related to financial remedies before HHJ Jacklin KC which resulted in a hearing on 19 August 2024 where she dismissed the Applicant’s application for financial remedies, made a Hemain injunction against the Applicant and ordered her to pay £6 000 in costs.
Cusworth J refused a further application by the Applicant for permission to appeal an earlier financial remedies order of 10 July 2024. On 9 September 2024, Mr Nick Goodwin KC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge, confirmed the courts of England and Wales have jurisdiction over both child arrangements and financial matters.
On 6 August 2024 the Applicant converted to Islam. One week or so later she issued proceedings in the Sharia courts of Dubai.
On 30 September 2024 the Applicant issued an application before the Dubai Personal Status Court and sought a schooling order. The Applicant issued applications for full custody of H and financial provision before the Dubai courts on 16 October 2024. The Respondent contested jurisdiction. On 29 October the Dubai judge refused the schooling order for want of jurisdiction. On 11 November 2024 the Dubai court dismissed the custody application made by the Applicant given the English orders.
A Dubai judge ordered the Applicant to hand over H to the Respondent. On 12 November 2024 a plain clothes police officer attended the Applicant’s home to try to hand H over to her father. This was not successful. H was handed over to the Respondent on 25 November 2024, following a further court ordered handover with a “settlement supervisor”.
On 26 November 2024 the Applicant applied for a travel ban to prevent H being taken out of the UAE. Around this time the Applicant’s lawyers acting under her power of attorney raised within proceedings allegations that the Respondent had harassed her for being a Muslim. I add that during her oral evidence she accepted the Respondent had never harassed for her being a Muslim. Her evidence was that her lawyers in Dubai acting under her power of attorney did this on their own account. On 27 November 2024, the father took H from the UAE to Turkey and onwards to the UK. On 28 November 2024 the Respondent issued a C2 application for leave to relocate. On the same day the Applicant petitioned the Dubai courts to freeze the Respondent’s bank accounts and assets, to issue a further travel ban and to seek the arrest of the Respondent.
On 3 December 2024 HHJ Jacklin KC heard an ex parte application and suspended the child arrangements order made by HHJ Oliver. She made a lives with order for H to reside with the Respondent and made a prohibited steps order against the Applicant.
The Applicant issued a C2 application for the summary return of H to Dubai on 10 December 2024. On 11 December 2024 HHJ Jacklin KC heard an inter partes hearing and determined to continue all the earlierorders made at the without notice hearing. The Applicant sought to appeal this order on 31 December 2024. On 19 February 2025 Peel J refused permission to appeal. The Applicant’s summary return application was listed for a half day directions hearing. This took place before me on 13 March 2025. I heard a pre-trial review on 12 May 2025. At both of these hearings I ordered significantly more contact between the Applicant and H. The Respondent rather belatedly accepted the need for this at each hearing. The Applicant was unable to leave Dubai because of the paternal grandmother’s criminal complaint about her. Very limited indirect contact took place between the Applicant and H. H was harmed by being denied time with her mother during this period.
Meanwhile in Dubai, a judge ordered the return of H to Dubai on 12 December 2024. The Respondent challenged the Dubai court’s jurisdiction. On 19 December 2024 the prosecutor filed a criminal case against the Respondent for kidnapping H and not enrolling her in school. On 25 December 2024 the Respondent was summoned to court to answer the criminal complaints. He did not attend. The Applicant gave evidence against him. On 15 January 2025 the Dubai court convicted the Respondent and sentenced him to two months imprisonment and deportation. A Dubai certificate dated 27 January 2025 noted the criminal complaint against the paternal grandmother remained under investigation. The travel ban made earlier against the Applicant in Dubai was finally discharged on 2 May 2025. This was no doubt delayed as the paternal grandmother has appealed an earlier dismissal of the criminal complaint she made against the Applicant.
At the May 2025 summary return hearing I heard evidence from the single joint experts in Dubai family and criminal law, briefly from the Respondent, solely on the topic of his future plans and from Ms Demery (as Cafcass had been asked to provide a short report). I refused the Applicant’s application for a summary return of H to Dubai. I was initially minded to transfer the matter back to the Central Family Court but ultimately determined to reserve the matter to provide for judicial continuity. I listed the matter for a prompt full welfare determination and joined H as a party. I ordered a significant amount of in person and indirect Zoom contact between H and her mother.