Refine your search

Keyword:

Grounds:

Show more

Year:

Country:

Show more

Article(s):

Show more

Order:

Show more

Requesting State:

Show more

Requested State:

Show more

Court Level:

Instrument:

Search results (108)

  • 2009 | HC/E/UKe 1016 | UNITED KINGDOM - ENGLAND AND WALES | First Instance |
    S. v. S. & S. [2009] EWHC 1494 (Fam)
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Return refused

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(b) 12(2) 12(1)

    Ruling

    Retention wrongful but return refused: Article 13(1)(b) had been established. A return to Lithuania would expose the child to an intolerable situation given his settlement in the United Kingdom.

  • 2010 | HC/E/ZA 1202 | SOUTH AFRICA | First Instance |
    Central Authority, RSA v. OCI [2010] JOL 25947 (GSJ)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(b) 13(2) 12(2)

    Ruling

    Retention wrongful and return ordered; none of the exceptions under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention had been established.

  • 2008 | HC/E/CA 969 | CANADA | First Instance |
    F.C. c. P.A., Droit de la famille - 08728, Cour supérieure de Chicoutimi, 28 mars 2008, N°150-04-004667-072
    Languages
    Full text download FR
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Application dismissed

    Article(s)

    13(1)(a) 12(2)

    Ruling

    Application dismissed and return refused; the removal was not wrongful and the child was in any event settled in his new environment.

  • 2020 | HC/E/NZ 1487 | NEW ZEALAND | Appellate Court
    Simpson v Hamilton [2020] NZSC 42
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Procedural Matters

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return refused

    Article(s)

    13(2) 12(2)

    Ruling

    The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. 

  • 2016 | HC/E/CL 1522 | CHILE | First Instance
    L. E. A. C. s/ Restitución Internacional
    Languages
    Full text download ES
    Summary available in EN | ES
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters |

    Order

    Return refused

    Article(s)

    1 3 13(1)(b) 13(2) 12(2)

    Synopsis

    Alleged wrongful retention of the child when he was 9 years old – National of Argentina – Unmarried parents –Argentine father – Argentine mother – The child lived in Argentina until November 2014 – The return request was filed before the Chilean court on 22 April 2016 – Return refused – Main issues: habitual residence, rights of custody, settlement of the child, art. 13(1)(b) exception of grave risk, objections of the child to a return, procedural matters - the habitual residence of the child before the removal was in Argentina – the mother had rights of custody under the Convention, and thus retention was not wrongful and the father had no standing to request the international return – over two years elapsed between the arrival of the boy in Chile and the filing of the request, and the child was already settled in – return would certainly put the child at risk of endangering his physical and psychological integrity, due to his mother and him experiencing family violence – the child openly stated his wish not to return to Argentina.

  • 2016 | HC/E/JP 1429 | JAPAN | Appellate Court
    2016 (Ra) No. 445 Appeal case against dismissal of case seeking return of a child
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return refused

    Article(s)

    3 4 13(1)(a) 20 12(2)

    Synopsis

    1 child (UK national) removed from Singapore to Japan ― Parents married in 2010, living together mostly in Singapore and briefly in Japan ― Father Singaporean national, mother Indian national ― Divorce in 2014 ― Father provided with access right, Mother with right to primarily care for the child and freely relocate with the child to Japan ― Mother went to Japan with the child and returned to Singapore in 2014 ― Failed access, Father sought a modification of the relocation clause and the modality of access ― Mother definitively removed the child to Japan in 2015 ― Assistance of the Central Authority of Japan revoked in 2016 ― The father filed a petition for the child’s return to the Osaka Family Court in 2016 ― Petition dismissed ― Appeal dismissed and return refused by the Osaka High Court in 2016 ― Main issues: Habitual residence of the child ― Rights of custody of the father or the Singaporean court.

  • 1999 | HC/E/AU 290 | AUSTRALIA | Appellate Court |
    Townsend & Director-General, Department of Families, Youth and Community (1999) 24 Fam LR 495, [1999] FamCA 285, (1999) FLC 92-842
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a)

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    13(1)(a) 12(2)

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed, removal wrongful and return ordered; the standard required under Article 12(2) had not been met to show the children were settled in their new environment. The standard required had been met under Article 13(1)(a) to show that the father had acquiesced in the removal, however, the court exercised its discretion to make a return order.

  • 1997 | HC/E/USf 237 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | Appellate Court |
    Ohlander v. Larson, 114 F.3d 1531 (10th Cir. 1997)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Interpretation of the Convention

    Article(s)

    3 12(2)

    Ruling

    Appeal allowed; the District Court had abused its discretion in denying the motion to set aside.

  • 1998 | HC/E/AU 291 | AUSTRALIA | Appellate Court |
    Director-General, Department of Community Services v. M. and C. and the Child Representative (1998) FLC 92-829; (1998) 24 Fam LR 178, [1998] FamCA 1518
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return refused

    Article(s)

    13(1)(b) 13(2) 12(2)

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed. Retention wrongful but return refused; the standard required under Article 12(2) had been reached to show the children were settled in their new environment.

  • 2000 | HC/E/CH 434 | SWITZERLAND | First Instance |
    Justice de Paix du cercle de Lausanne, (Magistrates' Court), decision of 6 July 2000, J 765 CIEV 112E
    Languages
    Full text download FR
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Return ordered

    Article(s)

    1 3 13(1)(b) 12(2)

    Ruling

    Return ordered; the removal was wrongful and none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

  • 1998 | HC/E/USf 122 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | First Instance |
    Zuker v. Andrews, 2 F. Supp. 2d 134 (D. Mass. 1998)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Return refused

    Article(s)

    3 12(2)

    Ruling

    Return refused; the retention of the child was not wrongful since at the moment of retention the child had acquired a habitual residence in Massachusetts.

  • 2004 | HC/E/USf 578 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | Appellate Court |
    Furnes v. Reeves, 362 F.3d 702 (11th Cir. 2004)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 12(2) 12(1)

    Ruling

    Appeal allowed and return ordered; the removal was in breach of actually exercised rights of custody and was therefore wrongful, none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

  • 2014 | HC/E/IT 1367 | ITALY | Superior Appellate Court
    Corte di Cassazione, sezione I civile, sentenza 30 Maggio 2014, n. 14792
    Languages
    Full text download IT
    No summary available
    Grounds

    Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(b) 12(2)

    Synopsis

    1 child wrongfully removed aged less than one year old - Unmarried parents - Joint custody - Child lived in Greece until May 2010 - Application for return filed in April 2011 - Return ordered - Main issues: Settlement of the child, Art. 13(1)(b) grave risk exception to return, procedural matters - Art. 12(2) of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention only applies where return proceedings have been commenced after a period of more than one year has elapsed since the date of the wrongful removal

  • 2009 | HC/E/1291 | European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR) |
    Tapia Gasca et D. c. Espagne (Requête No 20272/06)
    Languages
    Full text download FR
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

    Article(s)

    1 2 3 6 7 8 11 12 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2) 13(3) 12(2) 12(1)

    Ruling

    Unanimous: no breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). There was no separate issue concerning the claims based on Articles 6 and 13. The authorities' lack of diligence in preventing the abduction was admittedly manifest but had been indemnified by the Spanish authorities. The authorities had not been lacking in diligence regarding the child's return, despite the absence of results in this respect.

  • 2009 | HC/E/US 1260 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | Appellate Court |
    In re: B. DEL C. S. B., (minor), Mendoza v Miranda, 559 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2009)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return refused

    Article(s)

    3 12(2)

    Ruling

    Appeal allowed and return refused; the retention was wrongful but the child was now settled in her new environment.

  • 2015 | HC/E/JP 1427 | JAPAN | Appellate Court
    2015 (Ra) No. 708 Appeal case against an order for the return of a child
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Non-Convention Issues | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 4 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 12(2)

    Synopsis

    1 child removed at age 3 years  ― National of Canada and Japan ― Married parents ― Father and Mother married in Canada in 2009 and living there ― Joint custody at the time of wrongful retention ― Child lived in Canada until July 2013 ― Mother removed the child to Japan with Father’s consent ― A wrongful retention of the child after the entry into force of the Convention between Canada and Japan on 1 April 2014  ― Application for return filed with the courts of Japan in March 2015 ― Appeal dismissed and return ordered ― Main issues: Article 3 Habitual residence of the child ― The initial time of the wrongful retention ― Article 13(1)(a) Prior consent or subsequent approval by the father ― Abuse of rights by the father.

  • 2007 | HC/E/UKe 936 | UNITED KINGDOM - ENGLAND AND WALES | Appellate Court |
    Re M. (Children) [2007] EWCA Civ 992
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2) 18 12(2)

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the trial judge had not erred in the exercise of his discretion in making a return order notwithstanding having found the children to be settled in their new environment and that they objected to a return.

  • 2008 | HC/E/UKs 962 | UNITED KINGDOM - SCOTLAND | First Instance |
    C. v. C. [2008] CSOH 42, 2008 S.C.L.R. 329
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Return ordered

    Article(s)

    13(2) 12(2)

    Ruling

    Removal wrongful ad return ordered; the children had not settled in their new environment and the objectives of the older children were not of the requisite standard to justify a non-return order being made.

  • 2012 | HC/E/TR 736 | TURKEY | Superior Appellate Court |
    Supreme Court, Civil Chamber II, E. 2012/10867 K.2012/15417
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    12 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2) 16 13(3) 12(2) 12(1)

    Ruling

    Return ordered; the "grave risk of harm" exception had not been established.

  • 2011 | HC/E/UKs 1154 | UNITED KINGDOM - SCOTLAND | First Instance |
    IGR, Petitioner [2011] CSOH 208
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Jurisdiction Issues - Art. 16 | Brussels IIa Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003)

    Order

    Return refused

    Article(s)

    11 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 16 18 19 12(2)

    Ruling

    Removal wrongful but return refused; the child was settled in his new environment and the Court exercised its discretion not to order his return.