Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Article 15 Decision or Determination | Rights of Access - Art. 21
Appeal dismissed, application dismissed
3 15 21
Appeal dismissed and application dismissed; the removal was not wrongful for it had not led to the breach of any rights of custody.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters
Appeal allowed, return ordered
1 2 3 4 5 12 13(2)
Wrongful retention of a 5-year-old boy – Peruvian and American – Married parents –The child lived in Peru until September 2014, then the family changed its place of habitual residence to the United States – The mother filed a return request before the Peruvian courts on 24 August 2016 – Return ordered – Main issues: Habitual Residence; Removal and Retention; Settlement of the Child; Objections of the Child to a Return – The habitual residence of the child prior to the wrongful retention was in the United States – The mother had rights of custody over the child under the custody and visitation agreement approved by the U.S. court – The wrongful retention occurred because the father did not return with the child by the date established in the travel authorisation issued by the mother – The child was gradually detaching from the mother because of the father’s actions.
Rights of Custody - Art. 3
Application dismissed: all allegations presented by the father were ill-founded.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)
Return ordered
3 12(2)
Return ordered; the removal wrongful and the exception invoked, Article 12(2), was not applicable.
Rights of Access - Art. 21
21
Application to enforce foreign access order refused; Article 21 confers no jurisdiction on a court to determine matters relating to access.
Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2
Return refused
1 2
In the absence of any possibility of there being a substantive hearing in France the return of the girls was refused.
Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12
3 12
Appeal dismissed and application dismissed; there had been no wrongful removal as the Convention had not entered into effect between the United Kingdom and Ontario at the relevant date.
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Procedural Matters
7 13(1)(b) 13(3)
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been met.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3
Appeal dismissed, return ordered
3
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the retention was wrongful and the court upheld the trial court's view that the girls were still habitually resident in Germany at the relevant date.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3
Appeal allowed; the court held that the children were habitually resident in France when retained by the mother in the United Kingdom.
3 5
Return refused; the father had no rights amounting to custody rights for the purposes of the Convention. Consequently there could be no wrongful removal.
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)
Return ordered with undertakings offered
13(1)(b) 13(2)
Return ordered; the standard required under Articles 13(1)(b) and 13(2) had not been met.
3 15
Appeal dismissed and application dissmissed; the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts agreed that no custody rights of the father had been breached and refused to return the boys to Hungary.
Appeal dismissed, return ordered subject to undertakings
13(1)(b) 13(2) 12(2)
Appeal dismissed and return ordered subject to undertakings; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) to indicate that the child would face a grave risk of psychological harm had not been met.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings
Return ordered subject to undertakings
3 13(1)(b)
Return ordered subject to undertakings; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) to indicate that the child would face a grave risk of psychological harm had not been met.
Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)
13(1)(a) 12(2)
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the standard required under Articles 12(2) and 13(1)(a) had not been reached.
Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)
3 12 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2)
Return ordered; while the boy's objections to a return were valid and should be taken into account, the girl's were not and it was held that they should not be separated.
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
3 11 12 13(1)(b)
Appeal dismissed and return of the children to the United States ordered; the evidence did not support a finding of a grave risk of harm pursuant to Article 13(1)(b).
Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Interpretation of the Convention
Appeal allowed on the basis that there had been a breach of custody rights and case remitted to the District Court for the making of a return order and any appropriate incidental orders.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters
3 13(1)(b) 13(2)
Return refused; the removal was wrongful but the standard required under Article 13(2) had been made out with respect to the two older children, while the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) had been made out with respect to the youngest child.
