Case Law Search

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

Return refused

Return refused. The Mother acquiesced to X’s removal; both children objected to being returned to France; and to return only Y would place him at grave risk of psychological harm as he would be separated from his sister.

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

Return ordered

Return ordered.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b)

Return refused

Return refused based on the objections of the older child and a grave risk of harm to the younger children should they be returned.

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

Return ordered

Return ordered. The father had rights of custody and there was no ‘grave risk’ within the meaning of Article 13(1)(b).

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

Return ordered

Return ordered. The protective measures were sufficient to ensure that a return to Italy would pose no grave risk to the child, within the meaning of Article 13(1)(b). 

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Procedural Matters | Best Interests of the Child

Appeal dismissed, return refused

Wrongful retention of a child approximately 12 years old at the time of judgment – national of Argentina and Uruguay – separated parents – father of Argentine nationality – mother of Uruguayan nationality – child born in Argentina and lived there until around age 4, then moved to Uruguay with his mother – application for international return initiated on August 19, 2020, before the Uruguayan Central Authority – appeal dismissed, return denied – key issues: Art. 13(1)(b) grave risk exception, child’s objection to return; procedural matters; best interests of the child – returning the child would have entailed a grave risk of further psychological harm – the child's opposition to returning to Uruguay, considering his age and maturity, was decisive in denying the return – the Court indicated that mediation could be reopened to address the child's re-establishment of ties with his mother.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Legal Doctrine

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed, return upheld. The removal was wrongful and none of the exceptions raised was applicable.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2)

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the removal was wrongful and Article 13(1)(b) had not been proved to the standard required under the Convention.

Issues Relating to Return

Application dismissed

Application dismissed; there had not been a breach of Art. 6 or Art. 8 of the ECHR.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

Appeal allowed, the exception of grave risk was inapplicable; case returned to the Superior Court of the canton of Lucerne for a ruling on the terms of the return to Burkina Faso.

Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Issues Relating to Return

Return ordered

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

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Issues Relating to Return

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed and return ordered; a grave risk of harm had not been established to the standard required under the Convention. The trial court had moreover erred in the exercise of its discretion.

Issues Relating to Return

Issues Relating to Return

Application dismissed

Application dismissed because ill-founded; the Czech authorities had not breached Article 8 of the ECHR.

Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

Appeal inadmissible: the issue whether the Austrian courts may deliver a return order and take execution measures in a single ruling is not sufficiently substantial to justify an appeal. While admittedly there are no Supreme Court precedents on this point, the issue does not raise a substantial difficulty since it is clearly resolved by legislation.

Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

Appeal inadmissible; the appeal did not raise a substantial legal issue.

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

Appeal allowed, case referred to the lower court. If the court in the State of refuge contemplates denying return of the child (or its enforcement) owing to a grave risk of danger, it is a prior requirement to ascertain sua sponte that the necessary protective measures to make the return possible could not be taken.

Issues Relating to Return | Procedural Matters

Principal appeal inadmissible. The father was concealing his real address, thereby nullifying his appeal.

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Human Rights - Art. 20 | Issues Relating to Return

Return ordered

Retention wrongful and return ordered; none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention.