Al-Jeffery v Al-Jeffery (Vulnerable adult; British citizen) (No.3)

Where an adult freely instructs that protective proceedings should end, the court may permit withdrawal and discharge continuing orders, while preserving the effect of any earlier order that finally disposed of related proceedings. The court may record by agreement assurances given by a person responsible for the adult’s care and circumstances. Withdrawal does not necessarily mean that earlier proceedings were futile, particularly where they have contributed to improved protection, autonomy and family relationships. Costs may be dealt with separately, including by directing detailed assessment of publicly funded costs.

The judgment continued an earlier decision concerning Amina Al-Jeffery, a vulnerable British citizen living in Saudi Arabia. After her solicitor obtained confidential instructions from her in Jeddah, Amina confirmed that she freely wished to end the proceedings. She did not withdraw the allegations, but sought permission to withdraw the proceedings and discharge the continuing orders. The court was also asked to record assurances given by her father concerning her work, education, communications, marriage, future travel and equal treatment.

The central issue was how the proceedings should be concluded in light of Amina’s informed instructions and the improved relationship between her and her father.

1. Disposition. The court permitted Amina to withdraw the proceedings and discharged all orders previously made in the present proceedings and in the related forced-marriage proceedings.
2. The court recorded by agreement the father’s assurances that Amina would not be prevented from working, studying or pursuing her career and education; would have free access to her telephone and laptop; would be free to marry if and when she wished; would not be prevented from leaving Saudi Arabia when ready; and would be treated no differently from her sisters.
3. The order was to make clear that the order of 3 August 2016, which had dismissed the forced-marriage proceedings, remained effective. The withdrawal therefore did not undo that dismissal.
4. The court treated Amina’s instructions as freely and responsibly given after a confidential meeting with her solicitor and full legal advice. It accepted that continuing the proceedings would be counterproductive to the trust and relationship that had developed between Amina and her father.
5. The court observed that the ultimate withdrawal did not make the proceedings futile. The proceedings had contributed to Amina’s freedom, access to support and improved family relationship.
6. There was no order as to costs, save for detailed assessment of the applicant’s publicly funded costs.

The judgment continued the court’s earlier decision of 3 August 2016, reported as [2016] EWHC 2151 (Fam). It was not an appeal. The related forced-marriage proceedings had been dismissed by the order of 3 August 2016, and that dismissal remained effective.