The recent High Court family case of Re K [2025] EWHC 210 (Fam) has garnered significant attention due to its complex legal issues and the precedent it sets for future cases of its kind.
The case of Re K [2025] EWHC 210 (Fam)
The case concerned a 15 year old where the court had previously determined that the child should return to the USA, but that judgment has been set aside on account of the court having misunderstood the strength of the child’s objections. A Return Order was made at the end of July 2024 but at a hearing this month the court set that aside along with the mother’s application under the 1980 Hague Convention for the child to return to the USA.
Re K involved a dispute over the custody (living arrangements) and welfare of a 15 year old boy, born in the USA, where both parents presented conflicting claims regarding his best interests. The mother, in the US, sought sole custody and a return of the child from the UK to the US, citing concerns about the father’s ability to provide a stable environment and alleging a negative narrative being provided by father to the parties’ son. The father, in the UK on the other hand, argued that the child’s wishes should be followed and that his best interests would be bet by remaining in the UK where it was said he was thriving with a step-family, and that he was progressing and developing a relationship with his father that he felt he had not been able to enjoy in younger years.
The High Court judgment
The court had previously taken the view that the child was wrongfully removed from the care of the mother in the USA in 2024, but on further consideration of the matter this month, the court determined that greater weight should have been attributed to the boy’s expressed wishes, that he wanted to remain living with his father in the UK. The court considered the various competing Article rights and interference/infringement upon these, but determined that it was in the child’s best interests that his wishes to remain with his father were followed. It should be noted that when the court considers what is in a child’s best interests it considers the ”welfare checklist” which is a checklist of factors, one of which is the child’s ascertainable wishes and feelings in light of his or her age and understanding.
Implications of the case
The ruling in Re K gives rise to potential implications for similar cases moving forward particularly those involving consideration of the emphasis of sharing residence; the welfare paramountcy principle and also the weight to be attributed to particular factors within the welfare checklist including the child’s ascertainable wishes and feelings in light of his or her age and understanding. Parental involvement is considered beneficial from both sides unless there is risk or a reason for there not to be and so it is often a delicate balancing exercise. In terms of international disputes, it is a salient reminder that the matter will still come down to what is in the best interests of the child or children concerned – a child’s wishes at the age of 15 are in most situations likely to be considered carefully but they do not bind a court.
If you are in a similar situation or require support with international child disputes please get in touch with our Family team today on 0345 450 5558 or enquiries@stephens-scown.co.uk