The Family Court has given a Kuwaiti-born father permission to take his two children on a trip to Jordan.
In AB v TB (Temporary Removal to Jordan), Mr Justice Peter Jackson overturned a previous prohibited steps order made against the father. These are court directives which ban people from taking certain actions. In this case, the father had been told he was not to take his children out of the country.
The prohibited steps order was made in 2010, a year after the parents ended their decade long marriage. The Afghan-born mother was concerned that the father would take the children to Jordan permanently, as he had family there.
Both parents were Sunni Muslims, and the father wanted his children to experience Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting, and the subsequent feast of Eid in a Muslim country. In his application, he said he was settled in the UK and had no intention of keeping them in Jordan. The judge remarked that the father “values the education that the children are receiving” in England.
Meanwhile, the mother objected to application as she claimed not to trust the father and that there would be “disastrous consequences for the children” if they were to remain in Jordan.
Despite the fact that Jordan is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Mr Justice Peter Jackson ruled that it was “highly unlikely” the father would try to keep the children there. The Hague Convention is an international treaty to facilitate the return of children who have been taken from their home country by a parent.
Furthermore, the judge said there would be “very considerable” benefits for the children if they were to visit Jordan. He also placed a number of conditions for the father to meet before he would be allowed to make the trip. These included allowing the children to finish their respective school years and for the father to pay for the cost of a divorce from the mother.
To read the full judgment, click here.