Emd v Mam

CourtFamily Court (Hong Kong)
Judgment Date26 September 2014
Judgement NumberFCMP184/2014
Subject MatterMiscellaneous Proceedings
FCMP184/2014 EMD v. MAM

FCMP 184 / 2014






IN THE MATTER OF CID, a girl born on the XX February 2007 and RSD, a boy born on the XX November 2009
IN THE MATTER OF an application under section 10 of the Guardianship of Minors Ordinance. Cap. 13


EMD Applicant
MAM Respondent


Coram: Her Honour Judge Sharon D. Melloy in Chambers (Not open to Public)
Dates of Hearing: 27 August and 1 September 2014
Date of Ruling: 26 September 2014


(Interim custody and care and control)



1. This is an application by a father for custody and care and control and interim custody and care and control of the two children of the family, a girl named C who is now aged 7 ½ and a boy named R, who will be 5 years old in November.

2. I should say at the outset that I am extremely concerned by this application and the ramifications that arise from it.


3. In essence it seems from the papers that the father removed the children from their home in Brazil, without first seeking the leave of the Brazilian courts to do so and without obtaining the consent of the mother. This followed a three year legal battle, where the mother, who is Argentinean, did exactly the same thing to the father. According to the father’s affidavit the mother removed the children from Brazil on the 8 October 2011 without first obtaining an order from the court, or his consent. The children would have been very young at the time. C would have been 4 years and 8 months and R not yet 2 years of age. According to the father, litigation then ensued more or less continuously for the next three years. He said that during that time he did not have any physical access to the two children for 2 ½ years and in addition there was no telephone contact for 18 months. Eventually the children were returned to Brazil under the Hague convention and the court in Sao Paulo heard the matter substantively. On the 5 June 2014 the court made an order, which appears to be by consent as follows:-

Parties agreed as follows: (1) Defendant will begin to live in a permanent basis in the real estate located at the Rua XXX, X floor, which is with furniture, the plaintiff E assuring her stay in the place. It is registered that plaintiff E lives (and will continue living in a permanent basis) in the same floor no. 1 (middle floor). Plaintiff E agrees that the defendant M receives visits of her relatives in her real estate, without living in a permanent basis in the place; (2) During four months, the custody of the minors C and R will be carried out by the plaintiff E, and the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT