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 (349)

  • 2018 | HC/E/CH 1537 | SWITZERLAND | Superior Appellate Court
    Languages
    Full text download DE
    Summary available in EN | ES
    Grounds

    Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 |

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 5 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 12(2) 12(1)

    Synopsis

    one child wrongfully retained between age 4 and 5– National of unknown –unmarried parents – Father national of unknown – Mother national of unknown – Shared parental responsibility – Child lived in Portugal until 10 March 2017 – Application for return filed with the courts of Switzerland on 23 April 2018 – Return ordered – Main issue: Removal and Retention – The father could not prove that the mother had given her consent for the child to remain in Switzerland and the mother filed an appeal within the one year period set out in Article 12.

  • 2007 | HC/E/UKe 906 | UNITED KINGDOM - ENGLAND AND WALES | Appellate Court |
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters

    Article(s)

    13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2)

    Ruling

    Appeal allowed and case remitted to the trial judge to enable the child's views to be ascertained.

  • 2011 | HC/E/HU 1150 | European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR) |
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

    Article(s)

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

    Ruling

    The Court unanimously ruled that Hungary had breached Article 8 of the ECHR where domestic courts failed to act expeditiously in the proceedings to return the child and the national authorities had failed to take adequate and effective measures for the enforcement of the return order. It also awarded the father compensation under Article 41 of the ECHR.

  • 2011 | HC/E/UKs 1154 | UNITED KINGDOM - SCOTLAND | First Instance |
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    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.

  • 2011 | HC/E/CH 1086 | SWITZERLAND | Superior Appellate Court |
    Languages
    Full text download DE
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 5 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 26

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered. The removal was wrongful and none of the exceptions invoked was applicable.

  • 2024 | HC/E/JP 1630 | JAPAN | Appellate Court
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

    Order

    Return ordered

    Article(s)

    13(1)(a) 13(1)(b)

    Synopsis

    Father was a US national and mother was a Japanese national ― Parents married in 2014 in Japan ― Their sons were born in 2016 and 2017 in Japan respectively ― The entire family moved to California, the United States in 2018 ― In 2022 mother started to seek divorce but father refused ― Mother took the children to Japan in December 2022 ― Mother declared consensual divorce in February 2023 in Japan following their alleged divorce agreement entered in November 2022 ― Father denied to have signed a divorce form or divorce agreement ― Upon father’s petition, the Osaka Family Court ordered the return of the children to the United States ― Appeal dismissed and return ordered ― Main issue: Consent and Grave Risk.

  • 2015 | HC/E/USf 1383 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | First Instance
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | ES
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings

    Order

    Return ordered subject to undertakings

    Article(s)

    1 3 5 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 20

    Synopsis

    2 children wrongfully removed (born in 2005 and 2007) - Separated parents - The Purvian courts had effectively granted temporary custody to the mother on 21 November 2013, and then to the father on 1 October 2014 (following the removal)  - Children lived in Peru until 20 February 2014 - Application for return filed with the District Court on 17 February 2015 - Return ordered subject to undertakings - Main issues: rights of custody, Art.13(1)(b) "grave risk" exception to return, undertakings - A very severe degree of psychological abuse is sufficient to conclude that the Art. 13(1)(b) "grave risk" exception to return under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention applies, even in cases in which there is very little or no evidence of physical abuse

  • 2009 | HC/E/FR 1137 | FRANCE | Appellate Court |
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR | ES
    Grounds

    Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a)

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, application dismissed

    Article(s)

    13(1)(a)

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed, application dismissed. The father had acquiesced.

  • 2015 | HC/E/IT 1370 | ITALY | Superior Appellate Court
    Languages
    Full text download IT
    No summary available
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3

    Order

    Case remitted to lower court

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b)

    Synopsis

    1 child allegedly wrongfully removed - Married parents - Father national of Italy - Mother national of Italy - Joint custody - Child lived in Belgium until February 2014 - Return refused - Main issues: Rights of custody - A removal cannot be considered wrongful if it did not breach custody rights that were actually exercised at the time of the removal