Case No. NE24C50736 - [2025] EWHC 1767 (Fam)

The Mother, JK, is 33 to 36 years old. She has given several different dates of birth at different times over the last ten years. Her passport says that she was born in 1989 but she has also said she was born in 1992. Her current partner whom she married in a religious ceremony, but which marriage is not registered, Mr V is about 25. The Father, LM, is 46. The children are P, aged 14 or 15; Q aged 13, R, aged 10, and S aged 6. P, Q and R were born in a country in the Middle East I shall call “country Z”, S in Austria.

The parents claimed asylum for themselves, P, Q, and R in Austria in November 2015 having travelled from their home country of Country Z, purporting to flee violent repression. It is said that each parent was detained by the repressive regime at various times, that the Father was tortured, and the child P witnessed beheadings. Their escape from Country Z was perilous.

The family members were granted asylum in Austria on 1 September 2017 and S was born there in early 2019. In June that year, the child R very nearly died by drowning at a swimming pool when the Mother was sunbathing near to the pool but without a direct view of the pool or her child. R was then aged 4 years 10 months. This incident led to the Mother’s prosecution but not to her conviction. There were reports of S, then aged 7 months having been left home alone whilst the Mother picked up another child from kindergarten and of the children being left home alone in July 2021. The elder children reported domestic violence to the police: by the Father against the Mother and the children in June 2019, by the Father against the Mother and by the Mother hitting the Father back, in December 2020. There were reports of the mother cutting herself with glass in October 2019, and that she had beaten a child in February 2020. The Mother reported the Father had hit her on the head and strangled her so she could not breathe in March 2021. It was reported that the Father attempted suicide in front of S in the same month. The children were taken into interim care in November 2021 and later that month it was reported that the Father had strangled the Mother, covering her mouth so that she could not breathe.

In January 2022 it was noted by the Austrian authorities that P was at a special needs school. There had been several incidents of him being aggressive towards workers and children. He had been diagnosed with a mild intellectual disability, developmental disorder, PTSD and enuresis. He was prescribed medication for ADHD and was attending psychotherapy. Q was overprotective of S and had difficulties recognising boundaries. He was often in conflict with other children, would self-harm by punching walls, frequently openly, and had enuresis. R was a friendly child, increasingly settled in care. He was bed wetting when he saw a brother. S was developing well in care.

When making Guardianship Orders for the children, removing their parents’ custody rights and placing the children in long term residential care, the Austrian Court recorded in its judgment on 8 March 2022:

“Since 2019, a total of six restraining and prohibition orders under § 38 of the Security Police Act have been issued against the father in connection with acts of violence against the mother. In her application for an interim injunction dated 9.12.2021, the mother stated that shortly after their marriage, the father began committing acts of violence against her, specifically noting that on 17.3.2021, the father hit her on the head and strangled her so that she could not breathe. On 27.11.2021, the father again strangled her and covered her mouth so that she could not breath.

Both parents have an unstable psychological condition. Psychiatrist Dr. Petter has diagnosed both the father and the mother with "depressive adjustment disorder".

Furthermore, according to Dr. Petter, who treats both parents, a post-traumatic stress disorder is suspected in both parents, but cannot be definitively diagnosed due to their reticence.

Both the mother and the father currently pose an evident and serious threat to the well-being of the children under their care. Such an evident and serious threat to the children’s welfare would persist even if only one of the parents were to have sole custody.

The acute threat to the children’s welfare posed by the mother is, from a professional perspective, primarily due to chronic neglect in her supervision, especially concerning the minor S and the minor R. The mother does not adequately supervise the children. Due to this chronic neglect, there is, from a professional standpoint, a specific risk of accidents, as has already occurred in the past (cf. the near-drowning accident involving minor R). Moreover, during a two-hour observation of the interaction between the mother and the children, multiple situations arose that were considered hazardous, in which the mother did not react appropriately from a professional standpoint. What is crucial from a professional perspective is the mother’s consistent refusal to take responsibility in such situations. Due to her personality, it cannot be assumed that the mother is capable of recognizing and addressing the needs of the minors. It is also assumed from a professional standpoint that this inadequate supervision does not stem from an acute state of being overwhelmed but rather arises from the mother's personality.

Therefore, as a last resort, it is necessary to remove custody from the parents under Section 181 of the General Civil Code. Additionally, no indications have emerged during the proceedings that relatives of the children or other suitable persons could assume custody of the four children, making it necessary to transfer custody to the Child and Youth Welfare Authority of the Province of [State’s name redacted].”

P’s psychotherapist reported that he was subject to severe intimidation by the Mother, including the use of threats of the “devil” or “hell” and removal from the family. The Mother would undermine corrective attempts by other agencies such as schools. According to a psychological assessment within the Austrian proceedings, the “mental integrity” of all the children:

“… is severely compromised by massive psychological influence, stress, pressure to keep secrets, neglect, parentification, and trauma exposure.

… Within the family, no stimulating cognitive, emotional, ethical, or social incentives and experiences for the minors are observed. The family’s lack of social contacts and a "black-and-white thinking" of the parents do not correspond to the children's needs. The mother would hardly engage with the minors, but media consumption via mobile phone, tablet, and television seems to take priority and there is no shared playtime.”

Reports in January 2022, prior to the Austrian Court’s final order but about two months after the children had been removed from their parents’ care, revealed positive progress for all four children. LM moved away to another town in Austria but maintained family time with the children. Both parents engaged well with family time for the children but it was noted that the Father appeared better able than the Mother to respond to the boys’ needs. The Father was spending time with the children once a fortnight, enjoying activities with them such as swimming and going to a park.

On 2 July 2022 the Mother abducted the children. She has not given a full account of the abduction but has told the Court that she had decided that she needed to leave Austria because of threats made against her. Her evidence as to whether threats were made against her life and were made by the paternal uncles G and H as well as the Father, has been very inconsistent. She has told the Court that she informed the children that she was going to leave and they begged her to take them with her. On the Mother’s account she received help from an unnamed person who must have worked at the contact centre to arrange for the children to be in the playground, unsupervised, shortly before family time began. The Mother told me that she had arranged for a driver. He drove her to the contact centre and she got the children into the car and was driven across the continent to the French coast. She paid for a crossing in a small boat and she and the children arrived in England. She said that the cost of the driver and the boat amounted to EUR 15,000 which she had received from family members. There is no corroboration for her account. Naturally, corroboration from people smugglers would not be forthcoming. On the other hand, the family members who funded the abduction might have provided evidence but have not.

On 9 July 2022, on arrival in England, the Mother gave information to a Home Office Interviewing Officer for the purpose of completing an Initial Contact and Asylum Registration Questionnaire. It is recorded that she gave her own date of birth as being in September 1989 whereas the Austrian Court had her date of birth as being in January 1992. She gave the surnames of the four children as being her own whereas they had been known by the Father’s surname in Austria. She gave dates of birth for three of the children that differed from those recorded by the Austrian Court. She did not give any name or details for the Father but is recorded as saying that she had got divorced and that “my previous husband and his relatives they were going to kill me … they told my sister and nephew that they wanted to decapitate or slaughter me.” She denied having ever committed an offence. She did not reveal that the children had not been living with her in Austria but had been in care.

The Mother completed an Asylum Support Applicant Form with the assistance of a volunteer from Migrant Help on 14 July 2022. She again gave her date of birth as being in 1989 and gave the same dates of birth for the children as she had given on 9 July 2022. She said that her marital status was “married or civil partner” and that she had four dependants. She is quoted on the form as saying, “Victim of domestic violence by ex-husband, and he beat and raped me and the children.” She said that the children had “no contact with father” and gave no name or other details of the Father. Under “additional information” she said that “My ex-husband was abusive to myself and my children, beating and raping us. We fled because of him. I am now married to someone else…”

In her oral evidence to the Court the Mother said that she arranged for her sister to pronounce divorce three times to the Father on her behalf only after she had arrived in England. However, on 9 July 2022, within hours of arrival on the shores of England she said that she was divorced. In her oral evidence she denied ever having claimed that the Father had raped the children. She maintained that she was born in 1989. She said that she had not named the Father on the forms because she had not been asked. She told the Court that she had met Mr V in Austria but had no relationship with him whilst in that country. Upon arriving in England she telephoned him and told him that England was nice. He travelled over on a small boat across the English Channel and they married about a week after he had arrived which, she told the Court, was about one month after she had arrived in England. In fact, she declared on 14 July 2022, less than a week after her arrival that she had re-married. She told Dr Swart in April 2025 that she had not known that she was not allowed to remove the children from Austria and that:

“she met [Mr V] her current partner in Austria in 2021 and though they were married in a religious ceremony they weren’t formally legally married…. [She] said that when she moved to the UK she came with the children followed later by [Mr V].”

Mr V has not engaged in these proceedings. The current allocated social worker, Ms A, has tried to make contact with him for a discussion but he has not co-operated. The Mother told me that his refusal to engage was due to the influence of his mother. The Mother told me that she and Mr V do not live together but that he used to assist with taking the children to and from school, playing with them and with some shopping. On her accounts he was relied upon by her for child-minding at various times. She told the Court that she would rely on him in the future if the children were returned to her care.

The Mother and children spent a very brief time in London, then Bradford - where the Mother says she and Mr V were married - before moving to the Northeast of England.

On 8 August 2022 a GP recorded that the Mother had said she had fled Austria due to domestic abuse and that her husband had tried to kill her when he found out she was in a different relationship. That record suggests that the Mother told the GP that she was in a relationship with Mr V whilst they were both in Austria. The GP referred P to the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service.

On 8 September 2022, the police were contacted by a welfare worker with concerns that the three elder children had been left alone by “their parents”. The police recorded: “on being given advice it appears the family had only been resident in the UK for 2 days and were not aware of this issue.” The welfare officer had also expressed concerns about the state of the house but police officers found it to be relatively clean and tidy. Only twelve days later, on 20 September 2022 a member of the public contacted the police when S, then aged 3, had been found alone next to a motorway near to where the family lived. The police recorded that JK attended when they were with S and told them that he was her son. One of her other children was “on the other side of the motorway alone.” JK explained to the police that she had left the house with one son leaving the other three and Mr V asleep and that S had followed her out of the house without her realising. No other concerns were raised for the children.

By 1 November 2022, it was noted that whilst R had started school, P and Q had not attended school since arriving in England.

On 20 December 2022, the Mother’s GP noted a bruise on her face which she said had been caused by falling over and hitting her face on a table. Two days later the police attended the family home after a reported domestic dispute. It was reported to them by JK and Mr V that in fact Mr V was being threatened by LM. There were no other concerns about the children, who were present, or the state of the house.

On 31 January 2023, S was brought to the Royal Victoria Infirmary by Mr V and staff were sufficiently concerned about the lack of supervision of S and one of his brothers (unnamed) by Mr V that they made a referral to the Local Authority. Mr V threatened to leave the two children at the hospital unaccompanied. S was admitted for a liver condition and remained in hospital for several weeks. The following day the ward manager called the Local Authority with concerns about supervision and the reluctance of the Mother and Mr V to share their names and those of the children. On 15 February 2023, the Mother accepted a referral to the Local Authority’s Safer Families Team. A social worker visited the family home unannounced and found P home alone and presenting as “very vulnerable”.

During the first six months or so after arrival in England, it appears that Mr V was living with the Mother and children – certainly he was present or involved in caring for the children on each occasion when the police or social services had contact with the family. On three separate occasions members of the public or welfare workers had called the police due to concerns about the children and family, and hospital staff had referred their concerns to the Local Authority. However, enquiries had not led to escalating safeguarding concerns and, following assessment by a social worker, in April 2023 the family was “stepped down” to early help from the Safer Families Team.

The Mother was noted to have left R alone outside school on two occasions in May 2023, and in July 2023 staff at P’s school raised concerns with the Mother about P having demonstrated sexualised behaviour at school when he had unzipped his trousers to touch his genitals. The school also raised concerns with the Mother that Q and R were hanging around shops on their own. The Mother said the children did not listen to her and that in fact they had been accompanied by a 19 year old male. The school was sufficiently concerned to call the police about this. The police were satisfied that the children had not come to any harm but gave advice to the Mother that it was not safe for her children to be with the 19 year old male on the streets. It was recorded that a neighbour had recently called the police because they thought that S was playing out unsupervised. The Mother said she was watching him through the window.

On 13 August 2023, Mr V was arrested by police on attending the family home. The children were all present at home. The police record is that Mr V was the Mother’s “ex-partner”. He had “attended her address, he was refused entry due to a previous argument they’d had. [Mr V] is currently staying at a hotel and not allowed in the home address. It was reported that [Mr V] had smashed the rear living room window, however [JK] stated that she has not witnessed it and will not provide a statement to Police.” Mr V received a caution and Social Services were notified.

On 15 August 2023, an asylum worker called the police having found P, who was known by then to have autism spectrum disorder and was aged 12, home alone for over an hour.

On 22 September 2023 P’s school contacted social services because of extensive bruising to his right let right arm, left shoulder and face. The injury to his right arm “looked like a bite mark” which P said had been caused by R. He reported that his leg bruising had been caused by a fall on stairs at school but no incident was shown on cctv when that was checked. At a meeting at the school on 27 September 2023, involving the asylum seeker liaison officer, housing support worker and Early Help Adviser it was noted that the Mother had been offered support with P but had not taken it up. It was recorded, “Step-dad [Mr V] does not want Mum to learn English. He was also on the phone in the background throughout the meeting. Mum kept her phone face down on her lap but we heard his voice. Mum reported that her and [Mr V] are separated but he does come to see the family at the house.” It was noted that one of the other children [name redacted from the record] had been suspended from school, was frequently late for school and could be disruptive.

In October P’s school variously noted that he was sleeping at school and wearing pyjamas under his trousers. In late October it was noted that he had told a member of staff to “Fuck off”. On 7 November 2023 P’s school made a referral to the Local Authority following concerns including his sexualised behaviour including touching other pupils and mimicking masturbation and oral sex. He had been telling pupils about his grandfather having shot people at a school in Country Z. He had a “nasty looking scab” on his left arm. When asked about it he said that “when his mam was cooking she hit his arm with a pan that was still hot.” The Local Authority offered Early Help to the Mother. On 17 November 2023 the school again noted concerns about P’s sexualised behaviour and about his internet use not being monitored at home.

On 28 November 2023, the Mother and all four children were granted refugee status with leave to remain until 28 November 2028.

On 3 January 2024, the Mother and children moved to homeless accommodation at “X Home”. It appears that Mr V was also housed in another unit at the same accommodation.

On 28 February 2024, the Mother reported that she had removed P’s mobile phone from him after he was looking at pornographic websites. On 14 March 2024, the school again expressed concerns to the Mother about P’s sexualised behaviours and that he was lacking guidance at home.

On 19 April 2024, Q was left unsupervised at home for 1 hour 45 minutes in the morning. In the afternoon he was found alone at home with two carpet fitters at the home to which the family was to move, and a referral was made to social services. That evening P came to the reception at X Home and alleged that he had been hit by the Mother with a frying pan and that she had stood on his head. Staff called the police who attended. P changed his account from having been hit with a pan on his head to being hit on his bottom. The Mother and Q came to the reception area and Q said that P was lying and would get the mother into trouble. The Mother denied assaulting P and told police that she had restrained P when he had become angry and was smashing items after an argument with S. P had broken free and gone to the reception. The police arrested the Mother but no charges were brought against her.

On 21 April 2024, it was reported that Q had been left alone at home for over two hours with no food or drink and had been found by electricians. The following day he was again left on his own at the new flat. The Mother and children moved there on 24 April 2024.

In May 2024, the Austrian authorities advised the Local Authority about the Austrian proceedings. As I understand it, this was the first time that the Local Authority was made aware that the children had been removed from their parents’ care in Austria.

On 14 May 2024, P was observed to self-harm by hitting his face on his desk at school and punching himself on the leg. On 16 May 2024 P’s behaviour at school was described as “appalling”. He had told a girl to “suck his willy” and his sexualised behaviour was becoming more of a concern. The Mother reported that she keeps him away from his siblings and that he will “behave for his stepfather but not for her.” On a social worker’s visit on 24 May 2024, Mr V had been present at the family home and was described as “volatile” and shouting at the social worker. He would not provide his name or date of birth and would not take part in any assessment. The Mother had bruising to her arms which she said had been caused when separating the children.

On 18 July 2024 the Austrian children’s services authority advised the Local Authority that it viewed the return of the children to Austria “critically and not in the best interests” of the children.

Q was given a 12 week exclusion from his school in or around early September 2024. A social worker was working with the Mother at this time and on 12 September 2024 noted her concerns about the Mother being isolated and controlled by Mr V. On 13 September concerns were raised that Q was associating with persons known for exploitation. On 14 October 2024, Q was excluded from school for pushing a staff member. The children were by now all on a Child in Need plan.

Following a multi-disciplinary team meeting involving police and social workers at which concerns were recorded as including “neglect, lack of supervision, possible physical harm, possible exposure to scary adult behaviour, worrying behaviours from the two eldest boys, and their mother’s mental health”, there was a joint visit to the family home on 23 October 2024 having received information that other males were staying at the property who refused to give details to staff members. On arrival Mr V and the Mother were noted to “get a little hostile refusing to give required information.” The police decided to remove the children for their protection and to take them to a protected address. The following day care proceedings were issue by the Local Authority and Interim Care Orders were made on 25 October 2024, with P and Q being placed in one foster placement and R and S in another. On the same day P and Q ran away from Local Authority premises whilst awaiting transport to foster care but they returned later.

On 28 October 2024 foster carers for P and Q reported that they were damaging property and being physically and verbally aggressive towards each other. The carers ended the placement the following day. The children were throwing chairs and one social worker suffered an injured thumb. The boys were separated. A few days later their placements were swapped when P’s carer asked that his placement be ended. On 6 November 2024, Q attempted to open the car door when being transported to his foster care placement from school and was rude and aggressive. At family time on 15 November 2024 P and Q were fighting with Q punching P. There were continuing behavioural problems at their schools. Q’s placement was ended by his carer due to his behaviour on 10 December 2024. P pushed the Mother at family time the following day and on 12 December 2024 R and S’s placement was changed after R alleged the foster carer had grabbed his arm and had pushed S over. On 16 December 2024 the social worker informed the Mother that family time was becoming unmanageable with building and contents being damaged.

From 27 January 2025 and 4 February 2025 respectively, P and Q have been placed in a residential facility. Initially they were in the same bungalow but due to conflict between them they were later separated. On 24 January 2025 R and S were placed with a new foster carer. S remains with that carer but R had to be moved to another foster carer in late May 2025 after concerns about his relationship with S and R’s aggression to his carers.