Case Law Search

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

Appeal dismissed, return refused

The decision at first instance was confirmed and the children's return was refused on the basis of Article 13(1)(b). The ruling should be sent urgently to the Dutch authorities via the French Central Authority, in accordance with Article 11(6) of the Brussels II a Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003).

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Procedural Matters

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Jurisdiction Issues - Art. 16 | Procedural Matters

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed; decision ordering the children's return upheld, having considered with reasonable cause that none of the exceptions was applicable.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Human Rights - Art. 20 | Procedural Matters

Return ordered

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

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

The Court found that there had been a violation of Article 6(1) of the Convention and awarded damages to the father; the challenge founded on Article 8 was rejected as manifestly ill-founded, whilst the challenge on the basis of Article 5 of Protocol No. 7 was held to be inadmissible.

Issues Relating to Return

The Court ruled unanimously that there had neither been a breach of Article 8 (right to family life) nor Art 6(1) (right to a fair trial) in the manner in which the Polish authorities had processed and sought to enforce the order providing for the return of the abducted child to her State of habitual residence.

Article 15 Decision or Determination | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Procedural Matters

Appeal dismissed, refusal of Article 15 declaration confirmed

Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

Appeal dismissed, application dismissed

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

Appeal allowed, return refused

Procedural Matters

Removal wrongful and return ordered. However, the subsequent concealment of the child for eight years made enforcement of the original return order impossible.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3

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

Return ordered with regards to the two younger children subject to undertakings; the removal was wrongful and the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) of the Convention to indicate that the children would face a grave risk of harm had not been met. Application dismissed with regard to the oldest child.

Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Procedural Matters

Return ordered

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

Application that the Estonian courts' decision to return the child to Italy had been in breach of international law and contrary to the practice of the European Court of Human Rights declared inadmissible.

Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Interpretation of the Convention

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed, return ordered.

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

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered; retention wrongful as the children were habitually resident in Australia on the relevant date.

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

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

The court rejected the application for deferment of enforcement.

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

Appeal allowed, return refused

Appeal allowed; return refused. The daughters objected to a return that exposed them to a grave risk of danger, whereas no adequate measures had been taken in Belgium.

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

Appeal allowed, return refused

Appeal allowed, return refused. The child was settled in its new environment.

Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12

Appeal dismissed, application dismissed

Appeal dismissed and application dismissed; the removal was not wrongful as the father had consented to the relocation of the child on the basis of Article 13(1)(a).