Case Law Search

The mother and father had two children. The father was a member of the United States Air Force (“USAF”), and the family was stationed at a base in the United Kingdom beginning in 2023. In September 2024 the mother reported domestic violence by the father to the USAF Family Advocacy Program. As a result, the father was removed from the family’s residence and a series of temporary No Contact Orders prohibiting the father from contacting the mother and children were issued and eventually replaced by a non-expiring Military Protective Order.

In early 2025, the USAF approved the mother and Children’s return to the United States and arranged for their travel. The mother unenrolled the children from their on-base schools.

On the day the children left, the father initiated custody proceedings in the UK. The UK Court determined it had jurisdiction in relation to the children based on habitual residence and made an order prohibiting the mother from removing the children from the jurisdiction of England and Wales. The mother learned of this order when she landed in the United States, and initiated custody proceedings there. 

The father also contacted the England and Wales Central Authority for the return of the children under the 1980 Hague Convention.

At first instance the trial court ordered the return of the children to the UK. The mother appealed this decision.

The court reversed and remanded the case.

Procedural Matters

The first instance Court had erred in applying the relevant Indiana legislation (Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (“UCCJA”)). The court did not follow the correct procedural steps, failed to communicate with the UK Court, and had erred in finding that the mother had notice of the UK hearing when the UCCJA specifically states that it “does not govern the enforceability of a child custody determination made without notice or an opportunity to be heard.”

The court also held that the first instance decision had erred in relying on the 1980 Hague Convention in the absence of a petition seeking Children’s return to the UK. The father’s application to the Central Authority of England and Wales (“the ICACU”) was not a petition for Children’s return under the Hague Convention but an administrative request for the Central Authority in the United Kingdom to assist in securing the voluntary return of Children. There was no indication that the father had initiated any court proceeding under the 1980 Hague Convention or received an order directing the children’s return.