Mehvish Chaudhry

Mehvish has been described by Chambers and Partners as “one of the best young barristers in the child abduction field” and is highly respected for her expertise in international children cases. She regularly appears in these matters both in the High Court and at appellant level. Mehvish has appeared in over thirty published cases in this area, including, four Supreme Court decisions (K (A child) (Northern Ireland) [2014], Re B (a child) [2016], Re N (Children) [2016]) and G v G [2021] and the leading Court of Appeal decision on the child’s objections defence: M (Republic of Ireland) (Child’s Objections) (Joinder of Children As Parties To Appeal) [2015].

Mehvish accepts instructions in all aspects of international children law and is equally skilled at handling cases heard in the Family Division of the High Court in an abduction context and applications for international relocation in the Family Court. She has considerable experience of the panoply of applications that can be made pursuant to the Brussels ii revised regulation and 1996 Hague Child Protection Convention. Mehvish also has a particular expertise in cases which involve stranded spouses, allegations of female genital mutilation, and forced marriage.

Mehvish fully understands that these cases sometimes require urgent consideration and she is very happy to advise at short notice if required.

Notable International Family Law cases

Successful application by mother for summary return of children to Hungary. Father’s defences of habitual residence and consent not made out. Return ordered.

Application by step-father for return of children to New Zealand. Leave given to withdraw application.

Application by Father for summary return of his children to Italy under the Hague Convention 1980.

Application for a return order under the inherent jurisdiction in respect of a two year old who had been been removed to Jordan.

International contact.

Mehvish continued to represent the father on appeal, and successfully defended the appeal in the Court of Appeal.

Mehvish represented the father and was successful at first instance in arguing that the children should be returned to Dubai.

Mehvish appeared on behalf the mother in judicial review proceedings concerning Her Majesty Passport Office’s refusal to issue three children with British passports. Mehvish appeared as part of the legal team instructed to represent the mother in the Court of Appeal and successfully defended the appeal. The case is the first case in this jurisdiction to consider the applicable law provisions of the 1996 Hague Convention.

Mehvish appeared as part of the legal team instructed by the International Centre of Family Law Policy and Practice in the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The case considered the impact of the Refugee Convention and claims for asylum on the summary return procedure under the 1980 Hague Convention.

Mehvish represented the father in proceedings issued pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction for the return of the parties eldest child from Sierra Leone to England. The final hearing took place before Mostyn J by Zoom during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Mehvish appeared on behalf ofthe father in inherent jurisdiction proceedings seeking the return of the parties only child to his home in Bermuda. The final hearing took place before Mostyn J by Zoom during the Covid-19 pandemic. The judgment includes a number of observations about the legal framework governing applications for return of children between England and Wales and British Overseas Dependent Territories.

Mehvish, led by Edward Devereux QC, represented the father in proceedings which raise the question of whether documents from an asylum claim can be disclosed into family proceedings. Due to the legal importance and complexity of the issues theSecretary of State for the Home Department intervened in proceedings.

Mehvish appeared in the Court of Appeal on behalf of the intervenor, The International Centre for Family Law Policy and Practice, in 1980 Hague Convention proceedings concerning return to a “third state” and protective measures.

Mehvish was instructed by the Cafcass High Court Team in proceedings concerning the father’s application to take the subject child to Guinea, West Africa, where FGM is highly prevalent, in order to meet with his family. After hearing expert evidence, the court ordered that the child should not be allowed to accompany her father to Guinea because of the risk of FGM occurring due to paternal family pressure.

The Supreme Court considered the application of a lesbian parent for the return of her daughter to England from Pakistan. The Court gave consideration to the circumstances in which a child’s habitual residence, that had been established in one jurisdiction,is lost. Mehvish acted on behalf of the successful appellant and was led by David Williams QC (now Williams J).

Court of Appeal proceedings in respect of an application for leave to remove. Mehvish appeared on behalf of the older child and successfully argued that the general intention of the Children Act 1989 was to prevent the imposition of inappropriate requirements on older children. The first instance decision, in so far as it related to the older child, was overturned.

Mehvish appeared on behalf of the father in this landmark Court of Appeal decision in relation to the correct approach to be taken to the Article 13 child’s objections defence in 1980 Hague Convention proceedings.

A Supreme Court decision involving the definition of “Rights of Custody” for the purposes of Article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention. Mehvish’s research into the international jurisprudence was referred to extensively in the Supreme Court’s judgment.