Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
Return ordered subject to undertakings
3 11 12 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b)
The court ordered the return of the child to the USA.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3
Application dismissed
1 3 7 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2) 13(3)
Application dismissed; the retention was not wrongful as the children were no longer habitually resident in Australia on the relevant date.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)
Appeal dismissed, return ordered
3 13(2)
Appeal dismissed and return refused; the retention was wrongful and notwithstanding the child's objections to a return the Court exercised its discretion to make a return order.
Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
3 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2) 20 12(1)
One child (Russian national) born in 2014 resided in Russia ― Father and mother Russian nationals ― Parents married in 2014 in Russia ― Parents divorced in 2016 ― Mother took the child to Japan in October 2017 and settled there following her remarriage ― A ne exeat order of the Russian court was partly set aside by confirming the child’s temporary residence in Japan in January 2019 ― Central Authority of Japan assisted the Father with a return application in July 2018 ― Father filed petition for the child’s return to the Tokyo Family Court in October 2018 ― Return ordered ― Appeal dismissed by the Tokyo High Court in February 2019 ― Main issues: rights of custody and grave risk.
Rights of Access - Art. 21
21
Application to enforce foreign access order refused; Article 21 confers no jurisdiction on a court to determine matters relating to access.
Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2
Return refused
1 2
In the absence of any possibility of there being a substantive hearing in France the return of the girls was refused.
Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12
Appeal dismissed, application dismissed
3 12
Appeal dismissed and application dismissed; there had been no wrongful removal as the Convention had not entered into effect between the United Kingdom and Ontario at the relevant date.
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Procedural Matters
Return ordered
7 13(1)(b) 13(3)
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been met.
3
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the retention was wrongful and the court upheld the trial court's view that the girls were still habitually resident in Germany at the relevant date.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3
Appeal allowed; the court held that the children were habitually resident in France when retained by the mother in the United Kingdom.
Rights of Custody - Art. 3
3 5
Return refused; the father had no rights amounting to custody rights for the purposes of the Convention. Consequently there could be no wrongful removal.
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)
Return ordered with undertakings offered
13(1)(b) 13(2)
Return ordered; the standard required under Articles 13(1)(b) and 13(2) had not been met.
3 15
Appeal dismissed and application dissmissed; the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts agreed that no custody rights of the father had been breached and refused to return the boys to Hungary.
Appeal dismissed, return ordered subject to undertakings
13(1)(b) 13(2) 12(2)
Appeal dismissed and return ordered subject to undertakings; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) to indicate that the child would face a grave risk of psychological harm had not been met.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings
3 13(1)(b)
Return ordered subject to undertakings; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) to indicate that the child would face a grave risk of psychological harm had not been met.
Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)
13(1)(a) 12(2)
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the standard required under Articles 12(2) and 13(1)(a) had not been reached.
Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)
3 12 13(1)(a) 13(1)(b) 13(2)
Return ordered; while the boy's objections to a return were valid and should be taken into account, the girl's were not and it was held that they should not be separated.
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)
Appeal allowed, return ordered
3 11 12 13(1)(b)
Appeal dismissed and return of the children to the United States ordered; the evidence did not support a finding of a grave risk of harm pursuant to Article 13(1)(b).
Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Interpretation of the Convention
Appeal allowed on the basis that there had been a breach of custody rights and case remitted to the District Court for the making of a return order and any appropriate incidental orders.
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters
3 13(1)(b) 13(2)
Return refused; the removal was wrongful but the standard required under Article 13(2) had been made out with respect to the two older children, while the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) had been made out with respect to the youngest child.
