[2025] EWHC 2637 (Fam)

It is unnecessary for me to go into detail about this aspect of the case. I am satisfied that AD told the truth and that her childhood was blighted by her father’s frequent absences from home and the fact that she had to assume caring responsibilities for her mother. I am also satisfied that, as a girl, her father treated her less favourably than her brothers. I do believe that he loved his daughter and his wife but this love did not prevent him from behaving abusively to both of them. In the main, on the evidence, his abuse was verbal and sometimes involved threats but I accept AD’s evidence that there was an occasion when he was displeased with her and kicked her from behind causing her to hit her head. The father gave an account of this incident which I find to be untrue. I also accept that AD witnessed her father physically assaulting her mother in the manner she described which included grabbing her around the throat. Proceedings were brought against the father under the Family Law Act 1996 which resulted him giving undertakings to the court. His denial of the existence of those proceedings was manifestly untrue as was his allied suggestion that AD has somehow falsified documents such as solicitors’ letters and an undertaking form.

I reject the father’s case that AD has become his enemy as she is motivated by financial considerations and/or her displeasure at A being brought to England. I note that in one of his early statements in these proceedings he sought to emphasise that AD was an integral part of his family with whom he enjoyed a good and supportive relationship. He said something to similar effect in his police interview, as I have recorded above.