Case Law Search

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

Application dismissed

Application dismissed; the child was not habitually resident in Australia at the time of the removal and in any event there had been no breach of actually exercised rights of custody.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Procedural Matters

Judgment vacated and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit for further proceedings; the return of the child to Scotland did not render the case moot; there was a live dispute between the parties over where the child should be raised, and a possibility of effectual relief for the prevailing parent.

Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

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

Appeal allowed, return ordered

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

Appeal allowed, return refused

Appeal allowed and return refused; the removal was wrongful but a return to Portugal would expose the child to a grave risk of danger.

Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and non-return order upheld; the retention of the children was wrongful but the applicant father was found to have both consented to and acquiesced in the children remaining in New Zealand.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

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

Return refused

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

Return ordered

Retention wrongful and return ordered; none of the exceptions had been established.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Jurisdiction Issues - Art. 16 | Non-Convention Issues | Brussels IIa Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003)

Appeal allowed; the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that English law retained a discretionary, residual basis of jurisdiction over children based on their British nationality. The case was remitted to the trial court to decide whether to exercise this jurisdiction. Were the trial court not to exercise the jurisdiction, a preliminary ruling application would be made to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to enable the Supreme Court to decide on the habitual residence of the child.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings | Human Rights - Art. 20

Appeal dismissed, return ordered with undertakings offered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered with undertakings offered; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) to indicate that the child would face a grave risk of harm had not been met.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Role of the Central Authorities - Arts 6 - 10

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the boys were habitually resident in the United States at the relevant time and none of the exceptions had been made out.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3

Article 15 declaration granted

Article 15 declaration granted; the breach of custody rights vested in the English court was sufficient to make the removal of the child wrongful.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Undertakings | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters

Return refused

Return refused; the High Court exercised its discretion under Article 13 not to order the return of the children; grave risk of an intolerable situation and objections of the elder child both being established.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3

Appeal allowed, return ordered subject to undertakings

Appeal allowed and return ordered, subject to undertakings; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been met and the Court of Appeal ordered the return of the child subject to undertakings by the applicant father.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a)

Return refused

Return refused; the removal was not wrongful for the child was not habitually resident in Ontario on the relevant date.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters

Appeal allowed, return refused

Appeal allowed and return refused; the standard required under Article 13(2) had been met.

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

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the father had been actually exercising his custody rights and the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been met.

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

Return ordered

Return ordered; the retention of the girls against the wishes of the father was wrongful and the standard of harm required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been met.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Procedural Matters

Return ordered

Return ordered; the role played by the grandparents in the care of the child was sufficient to vest them with custody rights. These rights were breached when the mother removed the child.