The court considered the jurisprudence on habitual residence and upheld the finding of the first instance judge: that the child’s residence in the USA had not acquired the necessary degree of stability to become habitual. On the established principles, there was no basis to interfere with the judge’s finding.
Interpretation of the Convention|Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)|Human Rights - Art. 20
The application for return was dismissed. There was enough evidence to show that there was a grave risk of harm if to the children if they returned to Israel. The judge refused to order the return based on Article 13(1)(b) and Article 20.