[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions >> SB v RB and AM & Ors [2008] EWHC 938 (Fam) (23 April 2008) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Fam/2008/938.html Cite as: [2008] EWHC 938 (Fam), [2008] 2 FLR 1588, [2008] Fam Law 982

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
		23/04/2008

The Hon. Mr Justice Sumner :

Introduction

1. On 18 March 2008 there was a short hearing in this matter. It concerned SB who is 12 years old, DOB 11.6.95. Her parents married in Bangladesh in 1993. Her mother, RB, came to the UK in 1994 to join her father, RM a British national of Bangladesh origin. He died there in April 2001. SB was brought up by her mother in the Oldham area together with her sister H who is 8 and brother A who is 6 years old.
2. The mother remarried in 2002 in Bangladesh where she lived with her second husband M. She had 2 further daughters, S now 4 and AR who is 9 months old. She returned to the UK in August 2003 subsequently living at a number of addresses in London. She went back to Bangladesh in April 2006 with her children to visit her husband.
3. Whilst there and under pressure she says from M, who threatened to stop her returning to the UK, she agreed to marry SB, then aged 11, to SM a man about 20 years old in December 2006. This was acceptable she says in her culture. She brought her other children back to the UK in early 2007, leaving S behind with SM.
4. SB was made a ward of court by Bennett J on 29 March 2007. This was at the instigation of her litigation friend Anne-Marie Hutchinson and the Forced Marriage Unit of the Foreign Office and Home Office. Having been made a ward of court the Forced Marriage Unit made arrangements for her sensitive return to this jurisdiction. This occurred on 19 April and, following a short hearing, SB went to live with another paternal uncle AM in Croydon together with his wife EK and their baby daughter. He was later made a party to the proceedings. Due to the mothers' inability to recognise the implications of her actions, and the fact that to return SB to her mothers' care would be to place her back into the very circumstances that lead to her marriage in the first place, it was clearly inappropriate to return her.
5. There were a series of interlocutory hearings. The alleged marriage was declared void ab initio by Ryder J due to SB's extremely young age: she was only 11 years old at the time. At a hearing before me on 30 July 2007, CAFCASS were made SB's Guardian.

Hearing 18 March 2008

6. Mr Gupta appeared for SB, Mr Beddoe for the mother, and AM in person representing himself and his wife EK. The mother was not present. She did not dispute the facts. She wanted her daughter to return to her care. She did not consent but did not actively oppose an order being made for S to reside with AM who has looked after her since April 2007.
7. I was asked by Mr Gupta to give a short judgment. Though unusual to record events when the hearing was both short and not actively disputed, I agreed to do so. This was principally for the benefit of SB as she comes to terms with events. It also explains my reasons for approving the plans for SB on the basis of the statements and reports before me, no witnesses being called.

History of reports

8. There had been concerns about the mother's care in 2004 and 2005. This was at a time when the mother was living both in Bangladesh and London. It led to the 3 oldest children being put on the Child Protection Register in June 2005 under the heading of neglect. It appears that neither this nor the subsequent local authority reports were disputed. I therefore note their conclusions.
9. On 8 May 2007 following SB's return to the UK after her marriage, the court requested a s.7 report from the London Borough of Croydon where SB is living. It is dated 26 June 2007 and was prepared by a senior social worker, Ms Nursigadoo.
10. The mother told her that that it was wrong for SB to marry but she could not say why. She denied that she and her husband had received a large sum of money by way of dowry as AM asserted, which SB also agreed. The report was positive about AM and his wife and their wish to look after SB long term.
11. SB expressed a wish to live with her mother and bring her husband to England. She was happy living with her uncle and aunt.
12. The mother was considered to have low self-esteem. She was a vulnerable person. She appeared dependent upon her husband. Her lack of empowerment and emotional dependence had restricted her ability to protect S. She had upset SB, telling her to inform the court that she wanted to return to live with her mother.
13. Ms Nursigadoo felt that if SB returned to her mother she would be pressurised into maintaining a relationship with her husband by telephone contact. The mother wanted SB to return, not so much because she missed her, but she worried about her role as a mother in her community. SB for her part had no insight into the abuse that was committed against her.
14. Mrs Odze from the CAFCASS High Court team produced a helpful report of 7 March 2008. By then SB had had 2 supervised meetings with her mother and siblings in Oldham where they now live. She was attending weekly counselling sessions.
15. The mother accepted that she had made a mistake in agreeing to the marriage for SB. She wanted her home. SB missed her mother and siblings. She said no one had explained to her why she was not having more contact. It seemed that she blamed her stepfather M, which made remaining with her uncle and his wife more difficult. She was not mature enough to understand what was in her long-term best interests nor could she understand why her mother had failed her.
16. If she was returned to her mother it would be to the circumstances which led to her being unlawfully married off and where she had been a carer within the family. She might well be put on the Child Protection Register, and the therapy she was receiving and the progress she was making would not continue.
17. Also concerns were expressed about her stepfather being granted a visa to join the mother in the UK. She might miss out on any prospect of marrying a man of her choice. She had divided loyalties over contact.
18. Mrs Odze did not consider that her mother was capable of meeting her needs and in particular her emotional needs. The mother had sought to promote contact between SB and the man with whom her marriage had been annulled. SB might well revert to caring for the younger children and her education could again be jeopardised as it was earlier. She had made huge progress in her present placement.
19. Her uncle and aunt, AM and EK, had made a very high commitment to her at considerable personal cost. In particular her uncle had appreciated that contact with her mother and siblings were required despite his personal feelings. She recommended a residence order in their favour.

Conclusions

20. SB has had a deeply troubled upbringing. There was the death of her father which has yet to be explained. There is evidence that she was given a caring role in the family far beyond her years at the cost of both her education and her upbringing. There was neglect from a mother who was unable to cope. She was married at the age of 11 in Bangladesh to a man at least 8 years older than herself for whom she may retain feelings. She was left there to fend for herself.
21. When she was returned to the UK, it was to her paternal uncle and aunt. Her visits to her mother are understandably supervised at this time. She misses and no doubt worries about her mother and her siblings and half siblings.
22. For well established emotional reasons set out in 2 reports to which I have referred, it would at this time be potentially disastrous for her to return to her mother. It would put at risk the high degree of care that she has received and the progress that she has achieved.
23. Despite that quality of care, she has divided loyalties given her worries about her mother's state. There is the added problems which will be created should SM now come to the UK.
24. She has the great advantage of remaining within her family with relations who have demonstrated a high degree of care. They have also shown themselves devoted to her emotionally and financially. On the unchallenged reports I have read, it is I am satisfied that this is the best prospect for SB's future at this time both emotionally and psychologically if she is successfully to address her disadvantaged upbringing.
25. Finally I have seen Practice Guidance for Social Workers in relation to young and vulnerable people facing forced marriage. It is produced by the combined efforts of 5 different Ministries and has much to commend it.