International Child Abduction Research Articles

International Parental Abduction, A Study of Foreign & Domestic Laws with Judicial Decisions on Cross Border Child Disputes.

This research focuses on complex questions of law relating to family disputes furthermore specifically the complex problem of custody of children, which nowadays have increased due to the transnational migration and transnational families . Such disputes raise a large range of questions of laws in different jurisdictions having different criteria's and interpretations which results in prolonged custody disputes which may lead to child abduction. The paper further looks into the foremost convention on the said subject being The Hague Convention on The Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and the paper emphasizes on the jurisdictional related questions and their enforcement. In the next part of the paper, we look into the principles propounded by the Indian judiciary, the present laws and the legislative steps taken to tackle the problem.

Kryteria oceny sprzeciwu dziecka wyrażonego na podstawie art. 13 ust. 2 Konwencji dotyczącej cywilnych aspektów uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę w świetle wybranego orzecznictwa sądów

The subject of this paper is the way in which the courts assess a minor’s objection to a request for ordering his/her return, expressed on the basis of Article 13(2) of the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The author has found it relevant to deal with the titular issue, bearing in mind the importance and topicality of the problem. Despite the fact that the contents of Article 13(2) of the Hague Convention could suggest that the court, when assessing the child’s objections, considers only the question of his/her age and degree of maturity, the practice shows that many more demands are placed on the child, sometimes contradicting the general desire to empower the child in all proceedings concerning himself/herself. In order to illustrate this problem, the author analyses Article 13(2) of the Convention and selected court decisions based on this provision. On this basis, she specifies the factors evaluated by the courts if a child files an objection. The author distinguishes four categories of factors that are assessed by the court when a child objects, i.e. the form of the objection, the significance of the reasons given by the child to justify the objection, the independence of the child in making the decision to object, and the firmness of his/her views. Discussing the factors mentioned in the paper, the author expresses her conviction that courts often unreasonably, i.e. despite lack of support in the relevant provisions of law, set requirements that are almost impossible for a child to meet. Bearing this in mind, the author points out that the postulate of empowering children in civil proceedings will only be realizable if the courts enable them to oppose the petition in any way, but in accordance with their own convictions. Moreover, it seems reasonable to require that the child justify his/her standpoint in a manner adequate to his/her age, degree of maturity, and individual features, using arguments grounded in reality or justified from the point of view of the child and his/her subjective experiences. The author considers imposing any further requirements on the child to be unjustified and contrary to the best interests of the child in the broadest sense, as well as to the very idea of the Hague Convention.

Материально-правовые и процессуально-правовые вопросы разрешения споров на основании Гаагской конвенции о гражданско-правовых аспектах международного похищения детей 1980 года

The article is devoted to considering cases on the return of a child or on the exercising access rights in relation to a child on the basis of the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of 1980. The importance of cases concerning the return of a child or the exercise of access rights in respect of a child necessitates theoretical development not only of the procedural institutions, which norms regulate the examination of this category of cases by the courts, but also an analysis of the substantive aspects of disputes concerning the return of a child or the exercise of access rights in respect of a child on the basis of the 1980 Convention. According to the author, the relationship between substantive and procedural law is reflected in the principle of the best interests of the child, the subject of judicial protection, the specifics of the protection means and the subject of proof, as well as the specifics of the composition and procedural position of the persons involved in the trial of the category under study. Particular attention is paid to the tasks and powers of the central authorities established to ensure the unhindered and effective application of the 1980 Convention. It is proposed to transfer the powers of the central body in this sphere from the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation to the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. The development of the institution of mediation, including the active promotion of the expansion of mediation cooperation within the framework of interstate contacts aimed at resolving cases of the category under consideration, seems promising.

DETERMINATION OF A CHILD’S HABITUAL RESIDENCE IN INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION CASES: CHARTING THE WAY TOWARDS HARMONIZATION

The 1980 Child Abduction Convention is aimed at addressing the increasingly disturbing problem of trans-border parental child abduction, its key mechanism being to promptly return an abducted child to his or her country of ‘habitual residence.’ In essence, habitual residence is established as the chosen personal connecting factor in international child abduction cases. However, in view of the failure of the Convention to define the term, it has become the responsibility of the courts around the world to improvise their own standards for the determination. The objectives of the present paper, therefore, are to assess the deplorable situation of fragmented approaches and standards used by the courts in determining habitual residence of a child and to explore the recent developments in judicial pronouncements in order to be able to demonstrate the changing trend in the jurisprudence of the courts. To achieve these, the paper looks into and appraises the decisions of the courts of the United States of America, Canada, the European Union, the United Kingdom and other common law countries. The paper concludes that the changing trend is clearly discernible and a number of courts of States parties are increasingly applying a hybrid or combined approach rather than various subjective and one-sided approaches and thus moving towards the achievement of harmonization in the determination of a child’s habitual residence, the underlying principle of the Convention.

La libre circulación de resoluciones en la UE en el caso de la sustracción internacional de menores

El presente artículo aborda la regulación actual y futura del sector del reconocimiento y ejecución de resoluciones extranjeras en materia de sustracción internacional de menores en el ámbito de la Unión Europea. Materia específica que motivó la previsión de un régimen de eficacia extraterritorial de resoluciones judiciales distinguido – y privilegiado – al del régimen genérico de las resoluciones en materia de responsabilidad parental. Recientemente, el instrumento aplicable en la materia, el Reglamento 2201/2003 (Reglamento Bruselas II bis) ha sufrido un importante proceso de reforma que ha culminado con la aprobación de un nuevo Reglamento, el Reglamento 2019/1111. En este trabajo abordaremos el complejo entramado de fuentes en la materia, con la interacción tanto de fuentes de la UE como de Convenios internacionales, principalmente del Convenio de La Haya de 1980, analizando tanto el régimen actual como las modificaciones apuntadas. Con todo ello, se irán apuntando algunas de las tendencias actuales y futuras del tercer sector del Derecho Internacional privado en el proceso de construcción del espacio de libertad, seguridad y justicia de la UE.

Гаагская конвенция о международном похищении детей: защита интересов ребенкаили пренебрежение ими

The paper analyses provisions of Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction with regard to a principle of the best interests of the child. The jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights on the best interests of the child dictates they should be interpreted broadly and cannot be identified by the application of the legal presumption. There is therefore a potential conflict between this reading and a narrow interpretation of this notion by the Hague convention according to which the best interest of the child in the case of international abduction is to return to the state of habitual residence. To secure the best interests of the child while applying Hague convention it is necessary to take into consideration respective international standards.

Miejsce stałego pobytu dziecka. Cywilnoprawne aspekty uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę

Konwencja haska dotycząca cywilnych aspektów uprowadzenia dziecka za granicę nie zawiera definicji legalnej jej głównego pojęcia tj. miejsca stałego pobytu dziecka. Niedawno w sprawie Monasky v. Taglieri Sąd Najwyższy Stanów Zjednoczonych rozstrzygnął poważne rozbieżności pojawiające się w orzecznictwie amerykańskich sądów apelacyjnych w odniesieniu do tego, czy miejsce stałego pobytu dziecka powinno być ustalane na podstawie obiektywnych okoliczności dotyczących dziecka, czy też subiektywnego zamiaru jego rodziców, ustanawiając nowy standard oceny w oparciu o wszystkie okoliczności danej sprawy. Ponieważ jest to zupełnie inne stanowisko w porównaniu ze stanowiskiem polskiego Sądu Najwyższego, który uznał, że zamiar rodziców dziecka odnośnie miesjca jego stałego pobytu nie może stanowić podstawy rozstrzygania w tym zakresie, autor tego artykułu przedstawia rozwój orzecznictwa i doktryny w USA, wywodząc, że stanowisko polskiego Sądu Najwyższego powinno ulec zmianie.

Particularidades acerca de la autoridad judicial competente en supuestos de sustracción ilícita de menores en aras del Reglamento (CE) 2201/ 2003

La mayor parte del conjunto de casos de sustracción internacional de menores son una manifestación trágica y dolorosa de una crisis matrimonial o de pareja. En este marco de actuación, la retención transfronteriza, frente a las situaciones estrictamente internas, posee como elemento distintivo el desplazamiento o traslado del menor a cargo del sustractor con el fin de encontrar un sistema legal de cobertura distinto y más favorable a sus intereses. Para evitar múltiples perjuicios y, con miras a preservar el interés superior del menor, el Reglamento (CE) 2201/2003 blinda la competencia en esta materia a favor de los tribunales de la residencia habitual del menor. Si bien, la gran diversidad de causas que subyacen en el secuestro de menores no deben ser ignoradas a la hora de proponer la solución más adecuada.

Monasky v. Taglieri (U.S. Sup. Ct.)

The Supreme Court of the United States has decided four cases under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of the International Child Abduction (hereinafter the Hague Convention), the most recent one coming this term in Monasky v. Taglieri. The Hague Convention, adopted in 101 countries, requires the judicial or administrative authority of a country that is party to the Convention to return a child who has been wrongfully removed or retained to the country of the child's habitual residence.The Convention also provides for a limited number of defenses to return. The obligation of return is a “provisional” remedy, in that the merits of any custody dispute will be determined by a court in the country of habitual residence. One of the most critical aspects of the Convention is this concept of “habitual residence,” which was the issue presented to the Court in Monasky.

La intervención eficaz del Estado, en la restitución internacional de menores

El presente artículo explica de manera clara y sucinta el procedimiento que mencionan tanto la Convención de La Haya sobre los Aspectos Civiles de la Sustracción Internacional de Menores como la Convención Interamericana sobre Restitución Internacional de Menores. De igual manera, se tratan los antecedentes de la sustracción internacional de menores y sus conceptos básicos, a fin de que se pueda comprender en qué consiste una restitución internacional, así como los casos en los que se puede dar de manera genérica. Asimismo, se ejemplifican el número de casos que se han venido generado en nuestro país, el trato que se les ha dado y en dónde se han iniciado los mismos, pudiendo con ello el lector comprender que el fenómeno de la sustracción de menores no se trata propiamente de un aspecto particular de nuestro país, sino que, por el contrario, es una situación que, debido la globalización, cada día es más común, por lo cual los Estados tienen la obligación de brindar las medidas necesarias para evitar que se dé el mismo y, en todo caso, si ya se dio, se proporcione un procedimiento justo y acorde a las necesidades de los menores.

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL COOPERATION AND THE PRINCIPLE OF JURISDICTION: LESSONS FROM FAMILY LAW

This extended abstract aims to point out the need to conceptualize the principle of jurisdiction and to identify its main controversies in the field of international legal cooperation. Issues related to the notion of public order, private autonomy, rights and procedural guarantees, among others, have proved to be fundamental for a more adequate understanding of the subject of jurisdiction from the perspective of international legal cooperation. The specific study will address Hague Convention´s approach to the civil aspects of international child abduction related to the theme “right of custody” under the Family Law.

국제적 아동탈취의 민사적 측면에 관한 협약에 근거한 반환재판의 강제집행

아동은 시간의 경과에 따라 새로운 환경에 적응하기 때문에 탈취당한 부모의 입장에서 본다면 국제적 아동탈취 사건은 시간과의 싸움이라고 해도 과언이 아니다. 그러나 아무리 빨리 재판이 진행되더라도 확정재판에 기한 강제집행이 지연되거나 그 실시 가능성이 보장되지 못한다면 탈취당한 부모의 권리는 좌절될 가능성이 높아진다. 따라서 협약이 제대로 기능을 발휘하게 하려면 반환재판 절차가 신속하게 진행되어야 함은 물론, 확정된 반환 재판에 기한 강제집행도 신속하고 확실하게 실시될 수 있어야 한다.<BR> 그러나 이행법률은 협약실시를 위한 필요최소한의 내용만 담고 있어서 강제집행에 대한 명문 규정이 없고, 심지어 국내법상의 아동인도집행에 대해서도 가사소송법이나 민사집행법에 명문규정이 없다. 결국 실정법적으로는 간접강제 이상의 강제집행수단을 찾아보기 어렵고 실무적으로 의사능력이 인정되기 어려운 연령인 자녀에 한해 아동인도집행이 가능하다고 볼 수 밖에 없다. 이러한 상황을 바로잡으려면 아동반환을 명하는 재판에 대한 강제집행 제도를 입법적으로 정비할 필요가 있다. 이와 관련하여 각국의 입법례의 비교연구를 통해 마련된 모범실무지침은 강제집행의 신속성과 확실성을 보장하기 위한 다양한 방안들을 제시하고 있으며, 일본에서는 국내법상 아동인도사건과 협약사건에 대해 실질적으로 동일한 규율을 적용하는 새로운 집행제도를 2020년부터 시행하고 있다. 또한 독일에서는 아동인도집행과 관련하여 비례원칙에 의해 제한되기는 하지만 아동에 대한 물리력 행사를 포함하는 직접강제까지도 허용하고 있다.<BR> 아동의 복리 원칙이나 비례원칙에 비추어 볼 때 간접강제를 원칙적인 강제집행 수단으로 상정하는 것은 부득이하다. 그러나 반환재판의 강제집행 실현을 통해 실현되는 아동의 복리 또한 헌법 제36조 제1항에 의해 보호되는 이익이므로, 간접강제보다 강력한 강제집행 수단을 두지 않는 것은 탈취 당한 부모의 자유 보호에 치우친 것이라고 할 수 있다. 탈취당한 부모가 간접강제에 불응하는 경우 동원할 수 있는 강제집행 수단을 마련함에 있어서 일본의 경우처럼 대체강제 제도를 두는데 그칠 것인가, 독일의 경우처럼 아동에 대한 직접강제도 가능하게 할 것인가를 생각해 볼 필요가 있다. 이와 관련하여 모범실무지침이 권장하고 있는 것처럼 일단 직접강제와 같은 강력한 강제집행수단까지 마련해 두고, 반환청구를 인용하는 재판의 주문에서 비대체적 작위채무를 명하고 보충적으로 인도를 명하는 방식도 생각해 볼 필요가 있다.

Family mediation in international child abduction cases in Ireland: One size will not fit all

This paper explores how mediation can support the legal process in international cross-border child abduction cases in Ireland. It draws on research carried out as part of requirements for a Master’s degree in mediation and conflict intervention and reports on qualitative interviews with nine professionals with experience in international child abduction cases or extensive training in this field. It explores the role of the Irish Legal Aid Board‘s family mediation service in Hague cases and concludes that a ‘one size fits all’ model is unlikely to meet the need for flexibility in such cases.

Legal bases status quo children who were unafficiently carried out of Ukraine

The article is devoted to analysis of international law and norms of the operating civil legislation of Ukraine, which regulates the order of removal of a child from the country of permanent residence. The content of the principle of the best interests of a child identified a number of issues, which in practice can lead to the adoption of unreasonable decisions to return a child from abroad.Separately stated that the child should grow up in conditions of care and responsible parenting in an atmosphere of love, moral and material security; juvenile children, except when there are exceptional circumstances, should not part with their parents.The article analyzes the issues that arise, when the court is considering the cases of "the return of the children", when some courts mistakenly determine the jurisdiction of the following categories of cases, not paying attention to the fact that the court may consider the case both at the location of the defendant and the child, and at the location of the Ministry or its territorial bodies (alternative jurisdiction).The attention is paid to the fact that an important issue in the consideration of this category of cases about the return of a child is too long, in accordance with international law. These things are subject to quick consideration, in practice, there is a violation of the reasonable time of proceedings.Ukraine became party to the Convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction, has made a commitment to take all necessary measures to join the international cooperation mechanism that allows to solve questions of the organization in an orderly and rapid return of illegally removed or retained children, who have suffered from the consequences of wrongful conduct of one of parents or other family members, actions, which violated the rights of parents regarding child care, because the immediate return of the child allows to protect his\her rights and to prevent the infliction of moral harm and suffering

Występek uprowadzenia osoby małoletniej lub nieporadnej na tle regulacji międzynarodowych

International regulations provide comprehensive and sufficient protection against cross-border abductions and detentions. Among the most important international law instruments is the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. (The Hague, 25th October 1980) This international agreement allows protection for victims of the crime in question against its negative effects. In addition, the Convention guarantees the immediate return of the unlawfully abducted or detained to the country of permanent residence. Among the discussed international law documents, the Council Regulation No. 2201/2003 (the so-called Brussels II bis 27th November 2003) deserves special attention. It regulates jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments and parental responsibility.

Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction: content and methodological approaches to the application in judicial education

The article is focused on the most essential issues of the application of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of 25 October 1980 (“the Hague Convention”) in the judgements of Ukrainian courts and some methodological aspects of workshop development on the topic. The Hague Convention recently has been applied more often as an important international act. Moreover, there are at least 3 judgements of the European Court of Human Rights v. Ukraine on the matter (Chabrowski v. Ukraine, no. 61680/10, 17 January 2013; Vilenchik v. Ukraine, no. 21267/14, 3 October 2017, M.R. and D.R. v. Ukraine, no. 63551/13, 22 May 2018). The Court reiterates that in the area of international child abduction, the obligations that Article 8 of the ECHR imposes on the Contracting State must be interpreted, in particular, in the light of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of 25 October 1980 which also attaches paramount importance to the best interests of the child. Therefore such a topic was selected for a workshop to be developed and implemented in the educational process of the National School of Judges of Ukraine (NSJU). According to the Concept of National Standards of Judicial Training, which was approved by the Science and Methodology Council of the NSJU, and later became a part of the Rules of Procedure of the NSJU, all training courses for judges and candidates are developed taking into consideration three dimensions – so-called 3D (dimension) – which encompass knowledge, skills, and values. Therefore the workshop on the Hague Convention is designed using all 3D, and is aimed to consolidate knowledge and to develop judicial skills in application of the Hague Convention, Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) and ECtHR case law as well as to contribute to strengthening of the values of respect for human rights, rule of law, and enforcement of Ukraine’s international obligations. In order to achieve these goals, there certain tools and techniques that are effective in basic courses on the ECtHR case-law were used. In particular, the use of interactive adult learning methods – mini lectures, filling the analytical framework, video review, express survey etc. The development of the workshops took place jointly with a scientific research in this field, specifically focused of the new Supreme Court jurisprudence, the best practices and lessons learned. The results of the research has been used for the workshop development with the help of the modern innovative tools. Key words: Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 (Convention of Abduction), international child abduction, place of ordinary residence, Article 8 of the ECHR, practice of the ECHR, judicial education, methodological support, workshop.

The recast of the Brussels IIa Regulation: the sweet and sour fruits of unanimity

Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 recasts Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 as of 1 August 2022 at eight major levels: (1) international jurisdiction, (2) hearing of the child, (3) international child abduction, (4) abolition of exequatur, (5) enforcement, (6) authentic instruments and agreements, (7) placement of children in another member State and (8) cooperation. All decisions falling within its scope of application shall be exempt of exequatur, but at the stage of enforcement grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement may still be raised. The best interests of the child remains the paramount consideration of this EU instrument.

Getting Tough on International Child Abduction

International child abduction, typically undertaken by one of the child's parents, has become an increasing problem in recent years, particularly in the United States. Parents have encountered serious difficulties in repatriating an abducted child. The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, signed by the U.S. and many other countries, establishes an international procedure for pursuing claims of child abduction. The Office of Children's Issues of the Bureau of Consular Affairs of the U.S. Department of State is the Central Authority that administers the Convention and its implementing legislation for the United States. In the author's view (and his alone), the Office of Children's Issues has not been sufficiently vigorous in seeking sanctions against countries that do not comply with the Convention. Even after Congress passed legislation in 2014 specifically directing the State Department to apply increasingly severe sanctions against noncompliant countries (the Sean and David Goldman Act), the State Department has still essentially failed to do so. Brazil is one signatory to the Hague Convention that the State Department itself has determined to be consistently noncompliant with the Convention since 2013. Yet the State Department has failed to impose significant sanctions on Brazil, among other countries.

The child right to be heard in court (using the 1980 Hague Convention in Ukraine as an example)

The Hague Convention on Civil Law Aspects of International Child Abduction in 1980 introduced a mechanism for resolving issues related to the illegal export or maintenance of children by persons closely related to them. According to this mechanism, executive and judicial authorities must take measures to quickly return the child to the state of his usual place of residence. However, such a return may be refused if there are circumstances specified in the 1980 Convention. One of these is the court's identification of the child’s objections to his return, however, provided that the child has reached an age and level of maturity at which his opinion should be taken into account. Therefore, the court of Ukraine finds out the opinion of the child only if he considers that he has reached the required age and level of maturity. However, the abstractness of the wording of this circumstance leads to the fact that when considering return cases in Ukrainian courts, the child’s opinion is often not heard unreasonably (for example, if the court considers the child’s age insufficient to clarify his opinion, or because the defendant does not insist on hearing the views of the child, or because the parties fail to provide evidence that the child has reached the required age and level of maturity). In our opinion, the courts, in order to avoid such errors, should more actively implement the stipulated in Art. 13 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine the right, on its own initiative, to collect evidence regarding the subject of the dispute, in particular, by appointing a psychological examination aimed at determining the level of development of the child. Clarification of the views of the child should also be carried out with mandatory consideration of the provisions of Article 12 of the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which governs the right of a child to be heard. At the same time, it is worth introducing into the judicial practice of Ukraine the approaches enshrined in the Comments of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child of General Order № 12 (2009) “The Right of the Child to be Heard”, in particular, related to assessing the child’s ability to express his thoughts

International Legal Cooperation And The Principle of Jurisdiction: Lessons from family law

This extended abstract aims to point out the need to conceptualize the principle of jurisdiction and to identify its main controversies in the field of international legal cooperation. Issues related to the notion of public order, private autonomy, rights and procedural guarantees, among others, have proved to be fundamental for a more adequate understanding of the subject of jurisdiction from the perspective of international legal cooperation. The specific study will address Hague Convention´s approach to the civil aspects of international child abduction related to the theme “right of custody” under the Family Law.