New Summaries

Show only 
HC/E/PA 1341 PROD c/ DDMV An appellate decision from the Tribunal Superior de Niñez y Adolescencia in Panama declaring that the removal of the child to Venezuela was wrongful and the grave risk exception of Article 13(1)(b) raised by the mother was not established. When the decision was rendered, the mother's appeal against the rejection of her application to Panama's National Office for Refugees to recognize her and her child's status as refugees was examined. However, the Court considered that this was not an impediment to order the return of the child to the State of habitual residence.
HC/E/ 1337 Adžić v. Croatia (Application No 22643/14) A decision of the European Court of Human Rights holding, by six votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to respect for family life). The Court concluded that the time it took for the Croatian domestic courts to adopt the final decision failed to meet the urgency of the situation and could not be viewed as being in compliance with the positive obligation to act expeditiously in proceedings for the return of children. The Court further concluded that by not extending the application of a procedural rule contained in the Croatian Family Act, the domestic courts had not used the most expeditious procedure as required in Article 2 of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention.
HC/E/ 1336 M.A. v. Austria (Application No 4097/13) A decision of the European Court of Human Rights holding that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to respect for family life). The Court concluded that the Austrian authorities had failed to act swiftly to enforce an Italian court order ordering the return of the child to Italy, that the available procedural framework in Austria did not facilitate the expeditious and efficient conduct of the return proceedings and that, therefore, the left-behind father had not received effective protection of his right to respect for his family life.
HC/E/USf 1334 Mendoza v. Silva, 987 F.Supp.2d 883 A decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Western Division, in which, in a case concerning a wrongful retention of two children in the United States of America, consideration is given to the interpretation of habitual residence and consent as well as to the question whether the return order can be stayed until the children have completed the school year.
HC/E/ 1333 Bradbrooke v. Aleksandrowicz (C‑498/14 PPU) A decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union giving consideration to the application of Arts 11(6) to (8) of the Brussels IIa Regulation in a case where a child, who was habitually resident in Belgium, was wrongfully retained in Poland and the child's return was refused on the basis of Art. 13(1)(b) of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention.
HC/E/USf 1268 Headifen v. Harker, 549 Fed.Appx. 300 (5th Cir. 2013) United States litigation concerning the interpretation of habitual residence. The return application concerned a child who had lived in New Zealand with her parents for 3 ½ years before being unilaterally removed by her mother to the family's former home state. Appeal dismissed, the District Court had correctly found the child to have retained her habitual residence in Texas throughout the stay in New Zealand.
HC/E/USf 1144 Miltiadous v. Tetervak, 686 F.Supp.2d 544 (E.D. Pa. 2010) A decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on the grave risk defence under Article 13(1)(b).
HC/E/CA 1242 RM v. JS, 2013 ABCA 441 A Canadian appellate decision considering the manner in which the maturity of a child should be ascertained for the purposes of Art. 13(2) of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention and the standard to be applied to a child's objections.
RSS All cases Important cases Hague Convention cases Non-Hague Convention cases Brussels II bis cases Inter-American Convention cases
Disclaimer  |  Copyright © HCCH