Hague Child Abduction Convention Research Articles

THE ROLE OF CENTRAL AUTHORITIES IN THE APPLICATION OF THE 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION ON CHILD ABDUCTION: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF A GENUINE AREA OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW (1980 Tarihli Uluslararası Çocuk Kaçırma Sözleşmesi Uygulamasında Merkezi Makamların Rolü: Gerçek Bir Uluslarararası Kamu Hukuku Uygulamasına Eleştirel Bir Bakış)

There is a widespread consensus that the Hague Child Abduction Convention of 1980 constitutes a comprehensive attempt at the international protection of children. This article mainly intends to provide a roadmap for Central Authorities regarding the return requests within the meaning of the Hague Convention. It also touches on the emerging challenges faced by the Convention system while achieving a delicate balance between the competing or joint interests of the child as well as the left-behind and taking parents within the context of grave risk exception. In doing so, alongside with achievements made by Contracting States, this work will find a chance to make clear the overall handicap of the implementation mechanism. Lastly, it will be revealed that the translation of the Convention requirements into practice presupposes the full exercise of public power and the application of public international law norms, despite the Convention is a natural product of international private legal order

R. Schuz, The Hague Child Abduction Convention: A Critical Analysis

R. Schuz, The Hague Child Abduction Convention: A Critical Analysis

CHILD ABDUCTION: RECENT JURISPRUDENCE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

AbstractThis article examines how the European Court of Human Rights has clarified its jurisprudence on how the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention Article 13 exceptions are to be applied in a manner that is consistent with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It also analyses recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights on how the courts in the EU are to handle child abduction cases where the courts of the habitual residence have made use of their power under Article 11 of Brussels IIa.

U.S. Supreme Court Interprets Hague Child Abduction Convention

U.S. Supreme Court Interprets Hague Child Abduction Convention

War and Disorder: The Hague Child Abduction Convention – Australian Law in Context

The article seeks to examine the effect of international disorder on the operation of the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (the ‘Convention’). It seeks to do so by primary reference to the decision of the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia in Genish- Grant v Director-General, Department of Community Services (2002), which adopted the zone of war interpolation into the Convention, and surrounding case law. In so doing, various lacunae are discovered to exist in the Convention. Accordingly, suggestions are made for amendment to the Convention which would bring it more into accord with modern reality.

Children Caught in Conflict - The Child Abduction Convention and Australia*

In 2002, Peter Nygh, a former professor of law and later judge of the Family Court of Australia suggested that the High Court of Australia, in its interpretation of The Hague Child Abduction Convention, had ‘continued on its march away from international consensus’. This article explores the reasons for those expressed concerns, discusses whether they were justifiable, and examines more recent cases to see whether they tend to confirm or deny Peter Nygh's opinion. The article considers the extent to which, in Australia, the Child Abduction Convention is being implemented in practice and concludes that, in a concededly small sample of cases, there appears to be a tendency for national courts to refuse to send the abductor and the abducted child back to the country of abduction, possibly influenced by the uncertainty as to what might then happen to the child. The article concludes that to the extent that national courts do not give effect to the reciprocity principle in the convention, they undermine the mutuality upon which the convention relies.

A Defence of the Established Approach to the Grave Risk Exception in the Hague Child Abduction Convention

A Defence of the Established Approach to the Grave Risk Exception in the Hague Child Abduction Convention

U.S. Interpretation of "Rights of Custody" Under Hague Child-Abduction Convention

U.S. Interpretation of "Rights of Custody" Under Hague Child-Abduction Convention

Undermining the Hague Child Abduction Convention: The Australian Way … ?

Undermining the Hague Child Abduction Convention: The Australian Way … ?

Jurisdiction in Child Custody and Abduction Cases: A Judge's Guide to the UCCJA, PKPA, and Hague Child Abduction Convention Foreword

Jurisdiction in Child Custody and Abduction Cases: A Judge's Guide to the UCCJA, PKPA, and Hague Child Abduction Convention Foreword

The Hague Child Abduction Convention: Family Law and Private International Law

RESEARCH into the operation of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction has concluded' that it is operating remarkably well in returning children. Whilst no statistics are available to permit accurate comparisons with the pre-Convention situation, commentators agree2 that it is now much easier to get children back, although there is still a wide variation in the efficiency of the various central authorities and the willingness of different national courts to return. The United Kingdom has been singled out as particularly successful3 in this regard. The Convention should not, however, be judged solely by the number of children sent back and the speed with which the return is achieved, although prompt return is the stated aim of the Convention.4 In addition,

The Hague Child Abduction Convention — The Common Law Response

The Hague Child Abduction Convention — The Common Law Response