EWCA Crim 389
A mother who subjectively believed her daughter to be at risk of sexual abuse by her father was not entitled to rely on the defence of necessity against a charge of abduction where, in order to protect her, she had removed her from the jurisdiction in breach of a consent order. The whole purpose of making removal an offence under the Child Abduction Act 1984 s.1 was to reinforce the objective of retaining the child within the jurisdiction so that they could be subject to the court's protection. The defence of necessity was not available within that legislative scheme.
CA (Crim Div) (Sir John Thomas (President), Dobbs J, Underhill J)