Buscador de jurisprudencia

The parents began living together in 2011, had a daughter in 2012 and a son in 2014. Both children were born in Ireland. 

The family relationship was turbulent, both between the parents and between the father and maternal grandparents. 

The parents disagreed on the date at which they separated but it was 2020 or 2021. 

Various court orders were made including that the father have contact with the children every Saturday and that the mother not remove the children from the jurisdiction. 

The Mother moved to England with the children in August 2022 and said that the Father was aware of her plans. The Father said he was not aware and did not consent to the move. 

The Father filed an application under the 1980 Hague Abduction Convention for the return of the children.

The Mother argued that the children objected to returning, and that a return would put them at grave risk of harm or in an intolerable situation.

The parents were both of Nigerian origin. The Father was unable to travel out of Ireland as he did not have an Irish passport and required a visa to enter the United Kingdom.

Return ordered. The Article 13(1)(b) exception was not made out and, though the children objected to returning to Ireland, the Judge did not exercise his discretion to order a return. To do so would be inappropriate given that the situation was caused by the mother’s wrongful conduct in removing the children. 

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

The Mother was clear that she would not return to Ireland and that there were no protective measures that could be put in place to change her mind. Therefore, if the children return to Ireland, they would be separated from their primary career. It was unknown where they would live or attend school.

The Judge made sure to highlight that the supposed grave risk on return was a result of the mother's unlawful and wrongful conduct in taking the children to the UK. The Judge referred to the Guide to Good Practice on Article 13(1)(b) of the Hague Convention and found that the basic needs of the children could be met in Ireland and that the exception to return was not made out.

Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)

The Judge found that the children objected to return and were a sufficient age and a degree of maturity for it to be appropriate for their objections to be listened to and taking account of.

However, it was clear that the children had been influenced by the views of their mother, and even if that factor were not present, the judge refused to exercise his discretion in favor of a refusal to order their return. To do so would not be appropriate in a case where the conduct of the Mother had been so blatantly wrong.