Case Law Search

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Human Rights - Art. 20

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed, retention wrongful and return ordered; the child was habitually resident in the United States at the relevant date and the standard had not been met under Article 13(1)(a) to show that the father had acquiesced.

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

Return ordered subject to undertakings

Return ordered, subject to undertakings; the child was habitually resident in Canada on the relevant date.

Rights of Access - Art. 21 | Interpretation of the Convention

Application dismissed

Application dismissed; the Convention only applied to breaches of access rights occurring after the date on which the Convention came into force between the United Kingdom and Contracting States.

Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Role of the Central Authorities - Arts 6 - 10

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed; there had been a fundamental change in the circumstances since the original decision and it was now appropriate to take the girl's objections into account. The case was remitted to the trial judge.

Procedural Matters | Interpretation of the Convention

The court ordered that the English Central Authority inform the Spanish Central Authority of the facts of the case and that the father be advised of his rights under the Convention.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a)

Return ordered

Return ordered; the children were habitually resident in Germany at the relevant date.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3

The Court of Appeal upheld the finding that there had not been a wrongful retention under the Convention. However, the court allowed the appeal in that it stayed the substantive family law proceedings and held that the child's future should be determined in Texas.

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

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the father had not acquiesced in the removal of the children. The Court of Appeal also found that the trial judge had not erred in the manner in which he had made a determination as to the age and maturity of the eldest child.

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 | Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Procedural Matters

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and held that the father had acquiesced in the removal of the child. The case was then remitted to the High Court to exercise its discretion whether or not to order the return of the child.

Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Undertakings | Procedural Matters

Return refused

Return refused; there had been a wrongful removal but there was sufficient evidence to indicate consent on the part of the applicant father.

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

Appeal allowed; case remitted to the High Court for further investigation into the children's objections.

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

Return refused

Return refused; the removal was wrongful, but the court exercised its discretion not to return the children. This was on the basis of Article 13(2) with respect to the two older children, and on the basis of Article 13(1)(b) as regards the youngest child.

Rights of Custody - Art. 3

Appeal allowed, application dismissed

Appeal allowed and application dismissed; the removal of the child did not breach any rights of custody and was not therefore wrongful.

Human Rights - Art. 20

Application dismissed and return ordered; the Convention does not violate the Irish Constitution.

Consent - Art. 13(1)(a) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a)

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Appeal dismissed, removal wrongful and return ordered; the standard required under Article 12(2) had not been met to show the children were settled in their new environment. The standard required had been met under Article 13(1)(a) to show that the father had acquiesced in the removal, however, the court exercised its discretion to make a return order.

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

Appeal dismissed, return refused

Appeal dismissed, removal wrongful but return refused; the standard of harm required under Article 13(1)(b) had been made out.

Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Human Rights - Art. 20

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Appeal allowed, retention wrongful and return ordered within 21 days; neither Article 13(1)(b) nor Article 20 had been proved to the standard required.

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Undertakings

Return ordered

Return ordered; the child was habitually resident in the United Kingdom on the relevant date and his removal to Australia, without the father's consent or acquiescence, was wrongful.

Procedural Matters

Appeal allowed; the child was habitually resident in Sweden at the relevant date. The case was remitted to the High Court for a hearing to determine if an Article 13 exception applied.

Acquiescence - Art. 13(1)(a) | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2)

Return refused

Retention wrongful but return refused; the child was settled in his new environment in terms of Article 12(2); the mother had acquiesced in the retention in terms of Article 13(1)(a); and the child objected to being returned and had attained an age and degree of maturity at which it was appropriate to take account of his views in terms of Article 13(2).