Refine your search

Keyword:

Grounds:

Show more

Year:

Country:

Show more

Article(s):

Show more

Order:

Show more

Requesting State:

Show more

Requested State:

Show more

Court Level:

Show more

Instrument:

Search results (1381)

  • 2008 | HC/E/UK 994 | UNITED KINGDOM - ENGLAND AND WALES | Superior Appellate Court |
    E.M. (Lebanon) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] UKHL 64, [2008] 3 W.L.R. 931
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Non-Convention Issues

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return refused

    Ruling

    Appeal allowed and return refused; a return to Lebanon would flagrantly violate, or completely deny or nullify, both the mother and child's right to respect for their family life together.

  • 2008 | HC/E/AU 995 | AUSTRALIA | Appellate Court |
    Kilah v. Director-General, Department of Community Services [2008] FamCAFC 81, (2008) FLC 93-373; (2008) 39 Fam LR 431
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

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

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the retention was wrongful for the children had neither lost their Israeli habitual residence at the relevant date nor acquired a habitual residence in Australia. There was no grave risk of harm and whilst the father had at one stage consented to the relocation the trial judge had correctly exercised his discretion to make a return order.

  • 2009 | HC/E/CH 1001 | European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR) |
    Neulinger and Shuruk v. Switzerland (Application No 41615/07)
    Languages
    Full text download EN | FR
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

    Order

    Application dismissed

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(b)

    Ruling

    By a 4:3 majority the European Court of Human Rights ruled that there had not been a breach of the mother and child's right to family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

  • 2008 | HC/E/FR 1004 | FRANCE | Appellate Court
    CA Paris, 22 mai 2008, No de RG 08/05966
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Brussels IIa Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003)

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 12 13(1)(b) 20

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed; return ordered. The removal was wrongful and the mother had not established that an exception was applicable.

  • 2008 | HC/E/FR 1006 | FRANCE | Appellate Court
    CA Paris, 8 août 2008, Nos de RG 08/05791 et 08/07826
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return refused

    Article(s)

    3 12(2)

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed; the judge at first instance rightly considered that the children had settled in France.

  • 2005 | HC/E/FR 1007 | FRANCE | Appellate Court
    CA Rouen, 20 janvier 2005, No de RG 04/03822
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(b)

    Ruling

    Appeal allowed and return ordered. The removal was wrongful and it had not been proven that a return would expose the child to a grave risk of harm.

  • 2006 | HC/E/USf 879 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | Appellate Court |
    Karkkainen v. Kovalchuk, 445 F.3d 280 (3rd Cir. 2006)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, application dismissed

    Article(s)

    3

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed and application dismissed; the child had become habitually resident in the United States at the time of the retention, therefore the latter action was not wrongful.

  • 1998 | HC/E/ES 886 | SPAIN | First Instance
    Restitución de Menores 534/1997 AA
    Languages
    No full text available
    No summary available
  • 2006 | HC/E/CH 895 | SWITZERLAND | Superior Appellate Court |
    5P.380/2006 /blb; Bundesgericht, II. Zivilabteilung (Tribunal Fédéral, 2ème Chambre Civile)
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in FR
    Grounds

    Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a)

    Order

    Appeal allowed, return refused

    Article(s)

    1 3 13(1)(a)

  • 2006 | HC/E/GR 898 | European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR) |
    Bajrami v. Albania (Application no. 35853/04)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Procedural Matters | Non-Convention Issues

    Ruling

    In an unanimous ruling the Court held that Albania had breached Article 8 of the ECHR in that the efforts of the Albanian authorities were neither adequate nor effective to discharge their positive obligation under Article 8 to reunite the father with his daughter. The Court also made an award of compensation to the father under Article 41 of the ECHR.

  • 2007 | HC/E/ZA 900 | SOUTH AFRICA | Superior Appellate Court |
    Central Authority v. H. 2008 (1) SA 49 (SCA)
    Languages
    No full text available
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Undertakings | Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    13(1)(a)

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed and return ordered subject to a mirror order being obtained in the Netherlands; the retention was wrongful and the allegation that the applicant father had consented had not been proved.

  • 2010 | HC/E/FR 1044 | Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) |
    Mercredi v. Chaffe (C-497/10 PPU)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | ES
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Brussels IIa Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003)

    Article(s)

    3 19

    Ruling

    Preliminary Ruling issued, case remitted to United Kingdom (England & Wales) courts.

  • 2009 | HC/E/AT 1045 | AUSTRIA | Superior Appellate Court |
    1Ob176/09b, Oberster Gerichtshof
    Languages
    Full text download DE
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

    Article(s)

    1 3 5 13(1)(b) 26

    Ruling

    Appeal by the mother (the taking parent) dismissed: the removal was wrongful and none of the grounds for exception invoked were applicable. The father's appeal was partially allowed: removal of the condition of taking protective measures.

  • 2009 | HC/E/AT 1052 | AUSTRIA | Superior Appellate Court |
    6Ob181/09z, Oberster Gerichtshof
    Languages
    Full text download DE
    Summary available in FR
    Grounds

    Brussels IIa Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003)

    Article(s)

    4

  • 2005 | HC/E/ZA 1054 | SOUTH AFRICA | First Instance |
    Family Advocate, Cape Town v. Chirume
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Return ordered subject to undertakings

    Article(s)

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

    Ruling

    Removal wrongful and return ordered, subject to undertakings; a grave risk of harm had not been established to the standard required under the Convention.

  • 2008 | HC/E/ZA 1055 | SOUTH AFRICA | First Instance |
    Family Advocate, Cape Town and Another v. E.M.
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN
    Grounds

    Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Undertakings

    Order

    Return ordered subject to undertakings

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(a)

    Ruling

    Retention wrongful and return ordered; none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

  • 2009 | HC/E/USf 1110 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | First Instance |
    Foster v. Foster, 654 F.Supp.2d 348 (W. D. Pennsylvania, 2009)
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

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

    Order

    Return ordered

    Article(s)

    13(1)(b)

    Ruling

    Removal wrongful and return ordered, subject to undertakings; Article 13(1)(b) had not been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

  • 2010 | HC/E/CA 1115 | CANADA | First Instance |
    Achakzad v. Zemaryalai, [2011] W.D.F.L. 2
    Languages
    Full text download EN
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings | Jurisdiction Issues - Art. 16

    Order

    Return refused

    Article(s)

    13(1)(b)

    Ruling

    Removal wrongful but return refused; Article 13(1)(b) had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

  • 2009 | HC/E/CH 1075 | SWITZERLAND | Superior Appellate Court |
    5A_427/2009, IIe cour civile, arrêt du TF du 27 juillet 2009
    Languages
    Full text download FR
    Summary available in FR
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Jurisdiction Issues - Art. 16 | Procedural Matters

    Article(s)

    1 3 11 16 26

  • 2010 | HC/E/CH 1082 | SWITZERLAND | Superior Appellate Court |
    5A_535/2010, II. zivilrechtliche Abteilung, arrêt du TF du 10 août 2010
    Languages
    Full text download DE
    Summary available in EN | FR
    Grounds

    Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Procedural Matters

    Order

    Appeal dismissed, return ordered

    Article(s)

    3 13(1)(a) 26

    Ruling

    Appeal dismissed, return upheld. The removal was wrongful and there had been no consent to the removal.