Latest Decisions

  • Added on: 10 November 2017 |Superior Appellate Court

    Sentencia nº 16/2016 (Sala Segunda); Número de Registro 2937-2015. Recurso de amparo.|SPAIN |HC/E/ES 1382

    Languages
    Full text download ES
    No summary available
    Grounds

    Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Case remitted to lower court

    Article(s)

    1 11 12

    Synopsis

    1 child wrongfully removed at age 4 - National of Switzerland - Unmarried parents - Father national of Switzerland - Mother national of Spain - The lower courts had determined that the removal was in breach of the father’s custody rights - Child lived in Switzerland until August 2013 - Application for return filed with the courts of Spain on 7 November 2013 - Return refused at first instance, then return ordered on appeal - Main issue: settlement of the child - “Amparo” claim successful: the Constitutional Court found that the mother’s constitutional right to effective legal protection had been violated (no ruling on return / non-return) - A proper analysis of whether the child has become settled in its new environment should be conducted where a year has passed since the abduction occurred, in order for a decision to be rendered that is in the best interests of the child - It is immaterial that the delay is not attributable to the conduct of the parents; regardless of the cause, it may not affect the best interests of the child

    View case
  • Added on: 8 November 2017 |Appellate Court

    Thompson v. Thompson|RUSSIAN FEDERATION |HC/E/RU 1381

    Languages
    Full text download RU
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

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

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return refused

    Article(s)

    13(1) b) 12(1)

    Synopsis

    1 child wrongfully removed at age 2 - National of the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation - Married parents - Father national of United Kingdom - Mother national of Russia - Both parents had rights of custody - Child lived in Spain with both parents until April 2016 - Application for return filed with the Dzerzhinskiy District Court of St Petersburg on 18 August 2016 - Return refused - Main issue: Art. 13(1)(b) grave risk exception to return - A child aged 3 has a physchological and physiological need for her mother and since the mother had decided to stay in Russia, return to Spain would expose the child to a grave risk of harm

    This case forms the subject of an application to the European Court of Human Rights (Thompson v. Russia, Application no. 36048/17), lodged on 15 May 2017 and communicated on 23 October 2017. 

    View case
  • Added on: 10 October 2017 |European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR)

    Cavani v. Hungary (Application No 5493/13) |HC/E/HU 1379

    Languages
    Full text download EN
    No summary available
    Grounds

    European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

    Order

    ECrtHR - Violation of Article 8 ECHR, award of damages

    Article(s)

    11

    Synopsis

    Two children wrongfully removed at approximately ages 1 and 2 years old – Nationals of Hungary and Italy – Married parents – Father national of Italy – Mother national of Hungary – Shared parental authority – Children lived in Italy until June 2004 – Application for return filed with the Central Authority of Italy on 3 March 2005 – Return ordered before application to ECtHR on 16 January 2013 – Violation of Art. 8 ECHR – EUR 3,000 awarded in damages to father and EUR 3,000 awarded in damages to children – The failure to enforce the return order without any explanation or justification, which prevented the father and children from being reunited or seeing each other occassionaly for over seven years, amounted to a violation of the father's and children's right to family life

    View case
  • Added on: 9 October 2017 |Appellate Court

    A.L v. J.M., 2015 QCCA 638 |CANADA - QUEBEC |HC/E/CA 1377

    Languages
    Full text download FR
    No summary available
    Grounds

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

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered subject to undertakings

    Article(s)

    13(1) b)

    Synopsis

    2 children wrongfully removed at ages 7 and 8 - Nationals of Canada - Married parents - Joint custody - Children lived in Spain until September 2014 - Return ordered - Main issues: Art 13(1) (b) grave risk exception to return, procedural matters - A grave risk of placing the child in an intolerable situation upon return can be mitigated or eliminated by ordering return subject to appropriate undertakings

    View case
  • Added on: 9 October 2017 |Superior Appellate Court

    Cass Civ 1ère, 14/06/2017, Y c. X, N. 17-10980|FRANCE |HC/E/FR 1375

    Languages
    Full text download FR
    No summary available
    Grounds

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

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    1 2 3

    Synopsis

    1 child wrongfully retained at age 2 – Unmarried parents – Father national of Italy – Mother national of France – Italian court granted joint custody rights and decided that the child should live with the mother – Child lived in Italy until December 2015 – Application for return filed with the Central Authority of Italy in September 2016 - Application dismissed – Main issues: Rights of custody, habitual residence – It is up to the taking parent to prove that the left-behind parent was not exercising his rights of custody at the time of the removal or retention – It is for the authorities of the requesting State to determine the arrangements for the reception of the child upon her return

    View case
  • Added on: 9 October 2017 |Superior Appellate Court

    Cass Civ 1ère, 07/12/2016, Z c. Y, N. 16-21760|FRANCE |HC/E/FR 1374

    Languages
    Full text download FR
    No summary available
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return refused

    Article(s)

    1 3 5

    Synopsis

    1 child allegedly wrongfully removed at age 11 – Divorced parents – Father national of France and Morocco – Mother national of France – Full custody rights automatically awarded to the mother after the divorce under Moroccan law – Child lived in Morocco until October 2014 – Application for return filed with the Juge aux affaires familiales of France in December 2014 – Return refused – Main issue: Rights of custody – Rights of custody, including in particular the right to determine the child’s place of residence, has to be determined in accordance with the law of the State where the child had his habitual residence immediately before the removal

    View case
  • Added on: 9 October 2017 |Superior Appellate Court

    Cass Civ 1ère, 04/03/2015, Y c. X, N. 14-19015|FRANCE |HC/E/FR 1373

    Languages
    Full text download FR
    No summary available
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 4

    Synopsis

    1 child wrongfully removed at age 4 – Child lived in France until August 2012 – Return ordered – Main issue: habitual residence – Habitual residence should be determined in the light of all the factual circumstances particular to the case, including the parents’ shared intention and decisions taken with a view to ensure the child’s integration

    View case
  • Added on: 9 October 2017 |First Instance

    K.T. v. M.B., 2014 QCCS 3144|CANADA - QUEBEC |HC/E/CA 1376

    Languages
    Full text download FR
    No summary available
    Grounds

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

    Order

    Return ordered with undertakings offered

    Article(s)

    1 13(1) a) 13(1) b) 13(2)

    Synopsis

    2 children wrongfully retained, aged 11 and 13 on the date of the judgment - Nationals of France and Canada - Married parents - Mother national of Canada - Joint custody - Children lived in France until July 2013 - Application for return filed with the Superior Court of Quebec in October 2013 - Direct judicial communications took place - Return ordered - Main issues: consent / acquiescence, Art. 13(1) (b) grave risk exception to return, undertakings, objection of the child to return - Consent or acquiescence to the removal or retention must be clear, positive and unequivocal - The risk of the children suffering psychological harm by returning without the taking parent is mitigated by arranging for appropriate measures to protect the taking parent to be in place upon return, through administrative and judicial co-operation with the authorities of the requesting State - Return may be ordered if the child is mainly concerned about being removed from the taking parent, rather than being opposed to returning to the requested State or fearing the left-behind parent

    View case
  • Added on: 9 October 2017 |Superior Appellate Court

    Cass Civ 1ère, 25/09/2013, X c. Y, N. 12-25864 |FRANCE |HC/E/FR 1372

    Languages
    Full text download FR
    No summary available
    Grounds

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

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    13(1) b) 26

    Synopsis

    1 child wrongfully removed at age 7 – National of France – Married parents – Father national of France – Mother national of France – Child lived in Morocco until February 2011 – Application for return filed with the Central Authority of Morocco in March 2011 – Application dismissed – Main issues: Art. 13(1)(b) grave risk exception, costs – It is up to the parent who alleges an exception to return under Art. 13 of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention to prove that the conditions for non-return have been met – In accordance with Art. 26 of the Convention, the parent who wrongfully removed the child can be ordered to pay for the costs of the return proceedings

    View case
  • Added on: 6 October 2017 |Superior Appellate Court

    Corte di Cassazione, sezione I civile, sentenza 15 Luglio 2016, n. 18846|ITALY |HC/E/IT 1371

    Languages
    Full text download IT
    No summary available
    Grounds

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

    Order

    Case remitted to lower court

    Article(s)

    3 13(1) a) 13(1) b) 13(2)

    Synopsis

    1 child allegedly wrongfully retained at age 10 - National of United States of America and Italy - Divorced parents - Joint custody - Child lived in the United States until the second half of 2015 - Application for return filed on 21 October 2015 - Return refused - Main issues: Objection of the child to return - Due weight should be given to the child’s opinion where the child is considered to have attained an appropriate age and degree of maturity, even if certain aspects of the child’s opinion are considered to be imprecise

    View case