What amounts to a “fundamental change of circumstances” when seeking to set aside a Hague return order? – Ruth Cabeza and Alana Hughes in HG (Abduction: Application To Set Aside Return Order) [2026] EWCA Civ 971
6th Aug 2026 | Cases
Ruth Cabeza and Alana Hughes, instructed by Free Family Representation and Advocacy Project, appeared for the successful appellant mother in HG (Abduction: Application To Set Aside Return Order) [2026] EWCA Civ 971. The Court of Appeal provides important guidance on the high threshold for setting aside Hague Convention return orders where significant changes in a parent’s health arise after judgment, distinguishing between a temporary stay and a full reconsideration of the return order.
Allowing the appeal, the Court held that the judge had been wrong to refuse to stay a return order requiring a mother to return a young child to Texas where fresh medical evidence established that, in the late stages of pregnancy, she was no longer fit to fly. Although emphasising the high threshold for setting aside Hague return orders, the Court distinguished between the temporary impossibility of implementing the return order and the separate question of whether the order should ultimately be set aside. It remitted the application for reconsideration following the birth of the mother’s second child before a different High Court judge. The judgment provides valuable guidance on the interaction between Article 13(b), fresh medical evidence, and the court’s inherent jurisdiction to revisit return orders where circumstances have materially changed.
