Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
Appeal dismissed, return ordered
3 4 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 31
1 child wrongfully retained at age 2 - Married parents - Father national of the United States of America - Mother national of Canada - Child lived in the United States of America until 2013 - Application for return filed in 2013 - Return ordered - Main issue: Habitual residence, acquiescence and the Art.13(1)(b) grave risk exception to return - The application of the Art. 13(1)(b) exception requires the child’s exposure to a high degree, intensity and frequency of physical or psychological abuse - A return order that does not deliver the child and parent directly to the left-behind parent upon return diminishes the risk of incidents of domestic abuse occurring, while ensuring that the appropriate forum adjudicates the merits of custody and access issues
Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
Return ordered
1 2 3 4 5 12 13(1)(a)
Child wrongfully retained at age 12 – Citizen of Georgia – Divorced parents – Father national of Georgia – Mother national of Greece – Parents had joint custody – Child lived in Cyprus from 2008 until August 2012 – Application for return was filed with the Central Authority on 18 December 2012 – Main issue: Article 3 – the child’s State of habitual residence was Cyprus and there was no evidence to support the use of one of the exceptions to return under the 1980 Convention.
Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
1 3 4 Preamble 12 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b)
2 children wrongfully retained at ages 1 and 2 – Married parents – Father national of the United States – Mother national of Canada – Both parents had rights of custody under the laws of Iowa – Children lived in the United State until 16 June 2018 – Application for return filed with the Central Authority of the United States on 18 August 2018 – Return ordered – Main issues: Article 3 - children habitually resident in the United States, father had rights of custody and had only agreed to a one month stay in Canada, retention was therefore wrongful - Article 13(1)(a) Consent & Acquiescence – Exception not established, there is no “clear and cogent evidence of unequivocal consent or acquiescence” - Article 13(1)(b) Grave Risk – Exception not established, measures of protection are available in Iowa.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
1 3 4 5 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b)
Two children wrongfully removed at ages nine and seven – Married parents – Shared parental custody – Children lived in Spain until 5 February 2016 – Application for return filed with the courts of Switzerland on 17 February 2016 –Application dismissed – Main issue(s): Habitual residence - is understood to mean the actual centre of the child's life, which is determined by the factual circumstances; Consent - the departure of the spouse does not require any approval by the other; the only thing requiring approval is the change of the children's place of residence abroad; Grave risk - must be interpreted restrictively: meaning a serious danger, initial language and reintegration difficulties typically do not constitute a serious danger.
Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters | Brussels IIa Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003)
3 4 6 7 11 12 13(1)(b) 20
The Court unanimously ruled that Romania had breached Article 8 of the ECHR in failing to thoroughly assess the best interests of the child and to give the father the opportunity to present his case. It also awarded the father compensation under Article 41 of the ECHR.
