FD25P00113 - [2025] EWHC 2670 (Fam)

The following facts are agreed in the written evidence.

The parties left for Morocco on 19 December 2024. Both parties knew that the mother’s visa would expire in January 2025. It was agreed that the father would return early. The mother had asked the father to help obtain a new visa and he had approached a solicitor to do so. She undertook an English test, paid for by the father, in November 2024.

The father accepts that he did not attempt to renew the visa and lied to the mother about it.

The parties stayed with their families in Morocco. On 26 December 2024 the father issued divorce proceedings.

The father returned to London on 30 December 2024.

On 31 December 20204 and 1 January 2025 the mother sent photos to the father. The photos were of the family together and she said “bonne annee mon amour”.

The parties exchanged text messages on 30 December 2024 to 11 January 2025.

On 11 January 2025 A was unwell and the mother had sought medical assistance. She texted the father to say that was at the doctor’s and the father asked for information about the treatment

The father did not contact the mother after 11 January 2025

The mother was served on 13 January 2025. She then left a large number of voice notes in January and February 2025 that the father accepts he did not listen to.

The mother accepted that she knew her visa would expire when she was in Morocco but she was clear that the father was applying to get a new visa. She said that the trip was simply for a holiday. She had no intention to living in Morocco - her house was here and her son is British. She had left many of her possessions behind in England. She accepted that she had been lonely in 2022 but by 2024 was happy with the father, “despite the circumstances”. I pause her to say that Ms Baker’s note included, I believe “difficult”.

She accepted she had engaged in proceedings in Morocco but emphasised that the father had started the proceedings. She was forced to engage against her will. She did not want to be divorced in Morocco. It was a “big shock” to be served; if they had agreed to divorce there it would have been a consensual petition. The mother was focussed on the fact that the father had lied about his finances in Morocco. She did not accept that the Moroccan court had awarded a final sum of £6,500. She denied that that the father had given her £2,000 and pointed out that he had supplied no evidence. She denied that she was motivated by money. She told me that the father had reported her sister and brother- in-law to the police and that they wished to retract a statement in which they had suggested that the system was corrupt.

In relation to coercive behaviour she said that she had suffered from violence. She accepted there was no violence in the statements but “I mean control, controlling”. She said her income was restricted, that the father had cut up her card - she described it as an “unusual insult” - and closed the joint account. The father accepted throughout that he closed that account but denied cutting up the card

She denied that the father had given her financial support and said did not own a property in Morocco. She said that the father had deleted all her emails as he had her account details.

In evidence the father was asked about his Moroccan divorce documents. In the reconciliation hearing documents was written:

“He alleges that his wife does not respect him, and that she committed several acts he described as inappropriate for a Muslim woman, including wearing revealing clothes, threatening him with deportation from the UK and neglecting her religious duties. She behaved like a foreigner despite being a Muslim”

He accepted he had made those complaints. He did not withdraw them. He said that he found her clothes inappropriate. He said the mother would stand naked after a shower and in front of the window before the car park. He said his complaint was not focused on being or not being a Muslim but he could not accept her behaviour: she had given strangers her social details on Facebook and Tiktok. She had met people in the market and on the bus and given them details. “I do not accept it”, he said. He complained that she had not allowed him to sleep with her. He said her behaviour was shameful and immodest. He denied that he was a misogynist or controlling.

The father said that he had told her he wanted to divorce in September and that he was going to close the joint account. He had waited until the end of December to give her access. He accepted that he had moved the child benefit to his own account but did not cancel it until March 2025 as he did not think about it.

The father did not accept that he had controlled the mother financially. He had told her to open her own account. He gave her money each month.

In relation to the first allegation the father accepted that the mother had done an English test and she wanted a visa. On being asked why he said: “you can ask her”. He said it was because she wanted to “come and visit whenever she wants”. He accepted that he had not taken steps to renew the visa and that he had lied to the mother in text messages when he said he was doing so. He had started to instruct a lawyer but had not continued. He said that was because the mother had said he could not see his son after he came back to a hearing in Morocco.

He said it was better and easier for the mother to live in Morocco. A, he said was the best thing in his life; it was easier to see him in Morocco than a town in England or Scotland. He said that the parties had agreed that he would see A every two weeks but was unable to explain how that fitted in with the suggestion that the mother said he could not see his son.

He said that the mother was a “smart lady” and she could arrange the visa herself. He did not know how she would get a visa if she was divorced.

He did not remember if they had dinner together on 26 December 2024, the day of the petition. He did not remember if they had shared a bed but said they shared a room. He accepted that the happy photos sent at New Year were a bit weird, in the context of the divorce petition. He accepted that he had not listened to the voice notes which he explained was because the mother would scream at him. He said the voice notes and messages were part of her preparation for the litigation in England: she was trying to make her case.

He accepted that he had not contacted the mother after 11 January 2025 and had not sent any money to her when she asked.

He did not accept he had exploited her vulnerable position: she could get a visa on her own like everyone else. He said that he was not thinking when he left A’s passport with his grandmother: “maybe my mistake” but it “was not done with bad intention”.

The father said it was his right to apply for custody. He said he would live in England, France or Morocco to live with A, even Thailand. He said that it was not safe for A to live near the mother’s brother who was a drug addict.

He accepted he had lied to the Moroccan court about his income. He had not formally corrected the untruth but said the court had all the accounts. He denied that he had forced her to work.