A 13-year-old boy has begun legal action against his family over claims his parents 'brutally' took him abroad and enrolled him in a boarding school before 'abandoning' him there.

The boy, who cannot be identified, contacted the British Consulate and a child welfare organisation after his parents registered him at a school in Africa before returning to the UK.

Barristers for the boy claim his parents 'physically and emotionally abandoned' their son because they were concerned he was getting involved in gangs in London, something the teenager 'denies in the strongest terms'.

At a hearing which began on Tuesday, the boy's lawyers asked a judge to order that he be brought back to the UK, where he has lived since birth.

But lawyers for the boy's father said that he should be allowed to stay abroad and that the decision to 'relocate' him was 'a proper exercise of parental responsibility'.

In written submissions, Deirdre Fottrell KC, for the boy, said the parents' actions were based 'on the idea that there is no other way to respond to this potential risk than to remove (him) from the country'.

She said: 'The steps that this boy, not yet 14, has taken to try and remedy the awful situation he finds himself in are extreme.

'There is clear evidence that he is being harmed emotionally, psychologically and possibly physically in the environment in which he has been placed.'

Ms Fottrell added: 'It is extraordinary that his parents would consider it fair or appropriate to leave him in such an environment.'

She continued: 'The likely effect (of returning home) does not include being stabbed, shot or other dramatic outcomes that his parents fear based on their views of gang membership - (the boy's) evidence that he is not in any gang is categorical.'

The boy was described in court as 'very polite and articulate' and a keen fan of football and cooking.

Ms Fottrell said he was enrolled by his parents in a school abroad and was taken 'without consultation or warning' with few of his possessions, under the impression it was to care for an ill relative, before his parents left.

The barrister said this was a 'stark and quite brutal act' by the parents, with the boy reporting that he received 'inadequate' food and tuition, and was being 'mistreated'.

She continued that he is 'patently extremely unhappy' in Africa, that he claimed he 'hates it' and finds it 'humiliating', and that 'his English friends tease him for having been 'deported''.

Ms Fottrell also said that the boy's mother 'accepts having physically chastised and abused' her son while he was in the UK, and that while the boy 'is alive to the fact that he is not perfect', he is 'upset, confused and distressed'.

The judge, Mr Justice Hayden, said during the hearing that the boy was subject to 'incredibly restrictive' measures while in the UK, including having his location tracked through his mobile phone, which he said would be 'pretty unbearable for most 14-year-old boys and girls'.

Rebecca Foulkes, for the boy's father, said that social workers had outlined that, before the boy left the UK, there was 'difficulty in managing (his) behaviours and in trying to manage them the mother was using physical aggression on occasion to do so'.

But she also said that social workers had reported that he was frequently late to class, would sometimes stay out late and that his school claimed it had 'suspicions about him engaging in criminal activities' and made 'observations of him in expensive clothes and possession of phones'.

Ms Foulkes said this caused his parents to have 'real concerns about where he was and who he was with'.

In written submissions, she continued that the school 'recorded concerns about (his) social vulnerability and susceptibility to grooming', had been accused of stealing phones and had 'a number of photographs of knives on (his) phone including photographs of his friends holding knives'.

Ms Foulkes said: 'From the father's perspective, there was a clear deterioration in (his son's) behaviours with a move towards criminal behaviours.

'There is no real acceptance from (him) of the risks to which he was exposing himself.'

She continued that 'high-quality care and education in a boundaried setting' was available in Africa, 'where the risks to which he exposed himself in the UK are not present'.

Ms Foulkes added: '(He) has great potential which is likely to be squandered if he were to return to the UK.'

The court was also told that it should 'respect and uphold the decision (the parents) made as being in (his) best interests, even if it does not accord with his wishes'.

The hearing before Mr Justice Hayden is due to resume at a later date.