Case Law Search

Habitual Residence - Art. 3

Appeal dismissed, application dismissed

Appeal dismissed and application dismissed; the Convention was not applicable as the children had never lost their habitual residence in the United States during their two year ten month stay in Mexico.

Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Procedural Matters

Return ordered; appeal on Convention issues dismissed and appeal on costs order allowed.

Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

Return refused

Return refused; the removal was wrongful but the child was found to have become settled in his new environment.

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

Return ordered

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

Return refused

Retention wrongful but return refused; the boy was habitually resident in Ireland at the time of the retention, but his objections to a return were sufficiently cogent that the trial judge exercised her discretion not to make a return order.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Brussels IIa Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003)

Appeal allowed, return refused

Procedural Matters

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

Return ordered

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

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Procedural Matters | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed and return ordered; the retention was wrongful and none of the exceptions had been established to the standard required under the Convention.

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

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed. The removal was wrongful and the exceptions of the Convention inapplicable.

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

Appeal dismissed, return refused

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

Retention of the elder child wrongful and return ordered; none of the exceptions proved to the standard required under the Convention. Retention of the younger child not wrongful as she had only ever been habitually resident in England. Return ordered under common law rules.

Consent - Art. 13(1)(a)

Appeal dismissed, application dismissed

Procedural Matters

"Amparo" granted by the Constitutional Court which mandated the Court of Appeals to decide on the merits of the appeal.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Human Rights - Art. 20 | Issues Relating to Return

Return ordered

Removal wrongful and return ordered to a Member State other than the State of the child's habitual residence; none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12

Return ordered

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

Return ordered

Return ordered; the removal was wrongful and no exception had been established.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3

Return ordered

Return ordered; the removal was wrongful, the children being habitually resident in Germany at the time they were taken.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the children were habitually resident in Germany at the time of the removal, albeit the primary reasoning of the trial court was not followed.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3

Appeal dismissed, application dismissed

Appeal dismissed, application dismissed; the father's right to veto the removal of his child from Chile, under court order and Chilean statute did not afford him a custodial right and thereby a remedy for the purposes of the Convention.