13-year-old boy sues UK parents for sending him to boarding school in Africa

A 13-year-old boy has filed a legal complaint against his parents in the UK, accusing them of abandoning him emotionally and physically by sending him to a boarding school in Africa against his will.

The boy, whose identity is protected, contacted the British Consulate and a child welfare organization after his parents took him to Africa, enrolled him in school, and returned to the UK without him.

According to his lawyers, the move was a “stark and brutal” act driven by parental concerns over his potential involvement in gang activity in London—claims the boy categorically denies.

At a court hearing on Tuesday, November 26, the boy’s legal team, led by Deirdre Fottrell KC, argued that the boy is suffering emotionally and psychologically in his current environment. They described the food, tuition, and treatment at the school as inadequate.

They claimed his relocation was done without warning or consultation and under the pretence of visiting a sick relative.

“The steps this boy, not yet 14, has taken to try and remedy the awful situation he finds himself in are extreme,” Fottrell stated, emphasizing that the boy feels humiliated and mocked by friends in the UK for what they call his “deportation.”

In contrast, the father’s legal team, represented by Rebecca Foulkes, defended the decision as a legitimate exercise of parental responsibility.

They argued that the boy had exhibited concerning behaviour in the UK, including staying out late, wearing expensive clothes, and possessing photos of knives on his phone. Social workers had flagged his behaviour as a challenge, with instances of aggression and truancy.

“The parents had real concerns about where he was and who he was with,” Foulkes said, adding that the school in Africa offered “high-quality care and education” in a structured environment free of the risks present in the UK.

The case has raised broader questions about parental authority versus children’s rights. Mr. Justice Hayden, presiding over the case, acknowledged the restrictive measures placed on the boy in the UK, such as phone monitoring, and their potential impact on his well-being.