Habitual Residence - Art. 3

Appeal dismissed, return refused

1 child allegedly wrongfully removed – National of Poland and France – Married parents – Father national of France – Mother national of Poland – Both parents had custody rights over the child – Child habitually resident in France - child brought to Poland on 2 May 2017 - child brought to France on 22 May 2018 - child brought to Poland on 2 June 2018 - child brought to France on 13 February 2019– Application for return to Poland filed on 21 March 2019 – Return refused – Main issue: Art. 3 Habitual Residence – The child’s habitual residence remained in France - Father’s removal to France on 13 February 2019 was not wrongful.

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

Return ordered

Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Best Interests of the Child

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

Rights of Custody - Art. 3 | Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Settlement of the Child - Art. 12(2) | Best Interests of the Child

Appeal allowed, return refused

Removal and Retention - Arts 3 and 12 | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Interpretation of the Convention

Appeal dismissed, return ordered

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

Appeal allowed, return refused

Habitual Residence - Art. 3

Appeal allowed, return ordered

Habitual Residence - Art. 3 | Best Interests of the Child | Procedural Matters

Appeal allowed, return refused

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

Application dismissed

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

Return ordered

Return ordered. Though there was a grave risk to the mother and, indirectly the children, within the meaning of Article 13(1)(b), it was possible to put in place sufficient safeguards to mitigate that risk.