UK Judge, Andrea Martin-Swaby has ordered a mother to return her two young children to Britain by May 16. The mother had brought the children from the United Kingdom to Jamaica, claiming it was a one-month vacation. But she later enrolled the children in school without their father’s consent.
Justice Andrea Martin-Swaby ruled that the mother’s keeping the children in Jamaica was unlawful under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Both Jamaica and the United Kingdom are contracting states to this convention.
The children, who the authorities identified only by their initials, are GL, aged five, and G-JL, aged two. They were born in the United Kingdom and had lived there from birth until July 27, 2025.
Their mother brought them to Jamaica after their father consented to the one-month trip.
The court referred to the father as GBL in the judgment, and to the mother as SAM.
The mother did not return to Britain after the month-long trip. Instead, she enrolled the older child in school. When the father raised objections in September 2025, she claimed that he had accepted the arrangement by not voicing his disapproval. She said he did not object when she first suggested staying longer.
However, the court rejected those arguments. The UK Judge stated, “Even if I were to say that the Claimant’s (father) failure to comment may have been interpreted as him voicing no objection, his failure to comment is incapable of amounting to consent.”
The father initiated legal proceedings in February 2026, within twelve months of the children’s removal. This timing was crucial for the case.
The UK Judge used Article 12 of the Hague Convention to inform her judgment
According to Article 12 of the Hague Convention, a court must order the swift return of a child who has been wrongfully removed or retained. This article has been incorporated into Jamaican law through the Children (Guardianship and Custody) Amendment Act of 2017. And a return order is required as long as legal proceedings are initiated within one year of the removal.
“I have a duty to order their return,” Justice Martin-Swaby stated in her judgment, delivered on April 30. The judge heard the case on March 27.
The mother appeared without legal representation. She objected the return order on two grounds: claiming that sending the children back would expose them to grave risk of harm. She also asserted that the older child wished to remain in Jamaica with her.
But the Judge said when she applied the standard set by the UK Supreme Court, there is no grave and real risk of arm to the children. Furthermore, the UK Judge said there were no allegations of physical or verbal abuse.
Source: The Gleaner