Case Law Search

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

Human Rights - Art. 20

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

Return refused

Return refused; Article 13(1)(b) had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

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

Return ordered

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

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 children objected to a return, but in exercising its subsequent discretion the court found that there was simply so much in dispute and so much that required resolution that the appropriate forum for the substantive custody proceedings was South Africa.

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

Return ordered

Return ordered: the removal was wrongful, being in breach of actually exercised rights of custody, and none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

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

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed and return ordered; the court found the father had a right of veto over the removal of the child from the jurisdiction and given that he was exercising his access rights it was ruled that he would have exercised this custodial right had it not been for the unilateral nature of the removal. Consequently the removal of the child was wrongful.

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

Return ordered

Removal wrongful and return ordered; the child was habitually resident in Israel at the date of the removal and a grave risk of harm under Article 13(1)(b) had not been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

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

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the removal had been in breach of actually exercised rights of custody and none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

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

Appeal allowed and case remitted to the High Court - Court of First Instance; it had to be determined whether the child had been sexually abused as had been alleged.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3

Return ordered

Return ordered; the retention of the child was wrongful as the child, according to the parents' agreement, was still habitually resident in England, and none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

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) | Procedural Matters

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed and return ordered; the removal was wrongful and none of the exceptions had been established.

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

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

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

Return ordered

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

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed, return ordered. The retention was considered wrongful. The grave risk exception under Article 13(1)(b), raised by the defendant on appeal, had not been established. The children's opinions did not suggest a strong opposition that would be sufficient to constitute the exception to return under Article 13(2).

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Issues Relating to Return

Application dismissed

Appeal allowed and return ordered; the Article 13(1)(b) exception was no longer established.

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

Return ordered

Retention wrongful and return ordered; the child was habitually resident in the United States of America on the relevant date, and none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

Appeal dismissed; return order upheld. The Court of Appeal had duly provided grounds for its decision and was not required to conduct a more thorough investigation relating to a possible grave risk of danger.

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

Appeal dismissed, return refused

Appeal dismissed and return refused; the removal was wrongful but the children were now settled in their new environment. A discretion remained to order the return of children notwithstanding a finding of settlement, but the District Court's finding that the discretion should not be exercised was not to be disturbed.

Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Human Rights - Art. 20 | Procedural Matters | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

Appeal allowed, return refused

Appeal allowed, return denied. The girls had developed significant relations in Costa Rica (at school, with their family and social network) so return could imply serious consequences for the children. A return would, therefore, be contrary to the children's best interests, to Article 51 of the Political Constitution of Costa Rica and Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989. The Court also ruled that the exception to return in Article 20 of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention was applicable.