EN | FR | ES

Buscador de jurisprudencia

Nueva búsqueda

CASO

Texto completo no disponible

Nombre del caso

CA Paris, 23 mars 2006, No de RG 06/00395

Referencia INCADAT

HC/E/FR 1011

Tribunal

País

Francia

Instancia

Tribunal de Apelaciones

Estados involucrados

Estado requirente

Países Bajos - Reino en Europa

Estado requerido

Francia

Fallo

Fecha

30 March 2006

Estado

Definitiva

Fundamentos

Grave riesgo - art. 13(1)(b)

Fallo

-

Artículo(s) del Convenio considerados

13(1)(b)

Artículo(s) del Convenio invocados en la decisión

13(1)(b)

Otras disposiciones

-

Jurisprudencia | Casos referidos

-

Publicado en

-

SUMARIO

Sumario disponible en EN | FR

Facts

The application concerned two children born in the Netherlands in May 1997 and 1999.

The parents divorced in 2001 and entered into an agreement according to which the children would primarily reside with their mother in the Netherlands and with their father during holidays. Following a summer vacation in 2004, the father did not take the children back.

On 7 December 2005, the Tribunal de grande instance [ordinary court of first instance] of Paris declared the retention wrongful but refused to send the children back owing to a grave risk of harm. The Public Prosecutor appealed this decision.

Ruling

The removal was wrongful but there was a grave risk of harm to the children. The Public Prosecutor was asked to inform the Court of the steps taken to protect the children following their return.

Grounds

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

The father argued that when his daughter was aged 7 she had been the victim of rape at the family residence by her mother's live-in partner. The Court noted that the Public Prosecutor had not informed it of the response to the complaint filed by the father for sexual maltreatment.

It also noted that the mother had lied about the nature of her relationship with the alleged rapist (relations she initially contested as pure fabrication of the children) and that in a document representing the unofficial French translation of a letter from a psychologist (whose authority in the matter was not revealed) there were statements of support for the mother as youth worker (éducatrice) without any specifications about the provision of effective safeguards for the protection of the children following their return.

The Court therefore ordered the Public Prosecutor, under Article 11 of the Brussels II a Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003) and the United Nations Convention on of 20 November 1989 the Rights of the Child, to provide it with information on the steps taken to provide concrete and effective safeguards ensuring the protection of the children on return to the Netherlands.