Abduction
Re D (a Child) (Abduction: Child’s Objections: Representation of Child Party) [2023] EWCA Civ 1047, [2023] All ER (D) 05 (Oct)
The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled on various issues in relation to a child’s (D) appeal against the judge who found that D objected to being returned to Singapore but exercised his discretion by making a return order. D had acted through his solicitor during these proceedings, in which the solicitor was also appointed by the court as his guardian in the proceedings. The issues were whether: (i) the judge erred in his approach to the role of a solicitor who is also acting as guardian in proceedings under the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on Civil International Aspects of Child Abduction (the 1980 Hague Convention) and, as a result, wrongly attached no weight to the opinions of the solicitor; (ii) the judge erred in attaching little weight to the views of a Gillick-competent child on the basis that he had been exposed to the father’s undue influence; and (iii) the judge was wrong in the approach he
