London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Ali & Ors

A person served with a location order must disclose information within their knowledge or understanding which might reasonably assist in locating children. Breach is established where, beyond reasonable doubt, the respondent possessed such information and deliberately withheld or concealed it, including by misleading the police or court. The seriousness of deliberate obstruction of the administration of justice, particularly where children may have been removed across international borders, may justify immediate imprisonment. The court must assess the gravity of the breach while taking account of relevant personal circumstances.

The local authority applied to commit the father to prison for breaching a location order made under the inherent jurisdiction. The order required him to inform the High Court tipstaff of the children’s whereabouts, and of any information which might reasonably assist in locating them. The children had disappeared with their mother during ongoing public law proceedings. The issue was whether the father possessed relevant information about their likely whereabouts in Bangladesh and deliberately failed to disclose it.

1. The committal application was granted. The court found the breach proved beyond reasonable doubt.
2. The location order required the father to disclose not only the children’s exact whereabouts, if known, but also all information within his knowledge or understanding which might reasonably assist the tipstaff in locating them.
3. The father had admitted that he believed, by 11 March, that the mother and children were abroad in Bangladesh. His messages and the photographs received from Bangladesh showed that he had received and seen information materially assisting their location. The court found that he suspected their whereabouts even earlier.
4. The father deliberately misled the police by withholding his knowledge and suspicions. His conduct obstructed the police, social services and the court in their joint effort to trace the children. The breach was therefore deliberate and sufficiently serious to warrant imprisonment.
5. In fixing sentence, the court considered the absence of evidence that the father had helped plan the children’s removal and his responsibility for caring for his elderly mother. Those matters did not outweigh the gravity of deliberately obstructing the administration of justice.
6. A custodial sentence of four months was imposed, with the father to serve one-half of that sentence.

Not stated in the judgment.