Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (recast)
Date: 2016-06-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: child protection, enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, matrimonial law, mutual recognition principle, parental responsibility

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 30.6.2016  
COM(2016) 411 final 

2016/0190 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

 on jurisdiction,  the recognition and enforcement of  decisions in matrimonial matters 
and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction (recast)

{SWD(2016) 207 final} 
{SWD(2016) 208 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

• 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal 

This  proposal  is  a  recast  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201/2003  of  27  November  2003 
concerning  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  concerning 
jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the 
matters  of  parental  responsibility,  repealing  Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/2000  (hereafter 
"Brussels IIa Regulation"). 

The Brussels IIa Regulation is the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in family matters in the 
European  Union.  It  establishes  uniform  jurisdiction  rules  for  divorce,  separation  and  the 
annulment  of  marriage  as  well  as  for  disputes  about  parental  responsibility  in  cross-border 
situations.  It  facilitates  the  free  circulation  of  judgments,  authentic  instruments  and 
agreements in the Union by laying down provisions on their recognition and enforcement in 
other Member States. It applies since 1 March 2005 to all Member States1 except Denmark2. 

Ten years after the entry into application of the Regulation, the Commission has assessed the 
operation  of  the  Regulation  in  practice  and  considered  necessary  amendments  to  the 
instrument  in  its  application  report  adopted  in  April  20143.  This  is  an  initiative  within  the 
Regulatory Fitness Programme (REFIT). In addition, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) 
has so far rendered 24 judgments concerning the interpretation of the Regulation which were 
taken into account. 

The objective of the recast is to further develop the European area of Justice and Fundamental 
Rights based on Mutual Trust by removing the remaining obstacles to the free movement of 
judicial decisions in line with the principle of mutual recognition and to better protect the best 
interests of the child by simplifying the procedures and enhancing their efficiency. 

The  Juncker  Commission's  Political  Guidelines4  emphasise  that  judicial  cooperation  among 
EU Member States must be improved step by step keeping up with the reality of increasingly 
mobile  citizens  across  the  Union  getting  married  and  having  children,  by  building  bridges 
between the different justice systems and by mutual recognition of judgments, so that citizens 
can more easily exercise their rights across the Union. 

While the Regulation is overall considered to work well, the consultation of stakeholders and 
a  number  of  studies  have  revealed  several  deficiencies  in  the  current  operation  of  the 
Regulation which should be remedied. Among the two areas covered by the Regulation, the 
matrimonial and parental responsibility matters, the latter were identified to have caused acute 
problems which need to be addressed urgently. 

1 

2 

3 
4 

To  those  Member  States  which  joined  the  Union  after  this  date,  the  Regulation  applies  from  the 
beginning of their membership (Bulgaria and Romania: 1 January 2007, Croatia: 1 July 2013). 
Denmark, in accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to 
the  Treaty  on  European  Union  and  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  does  not 
participate in the Regulation and is therefore neither bound by it nor subject to its application. 
COM(2014) 225 final. 
A  new  start  for  Europe:  My  Agenda  for  Jobs,  Growth,  Fairness  and  Democratic  Change.  Political 
Guidelines for the next European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, Strasbourg, 15 July 2014. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
As  regards  matrimonial  matters,  only  limited  evidence  of  existing  problems  (including 
statistics) was available at this stage to allow for a precise indication of the need to intervene 
and  the  scale  of  the  problems,  and  for  a  fully  informed  choice  of  any  considered  option. 
Furthermore,  since  the  adoption  of  the  Brussels  IIa  Regulation,  three  more  EU  instruments 
facilitating the handling of matrimonial matters in case of divorce of an international couple 
have been adopted. The Rome III Regulation5 contains rules on the law applicable to divorce, 
and  the  Maintenance  Regulation6  addresses  jurisdiction  and  applicable  law  concerning 
maintenance  for  spouses  and  children.  Moreover,  the  Council  most  recently  authorised 
enhanced cooperation with respect to the property aspects of international couples.7  

Essentially,  six  main  shortcomings  concerning  parental  responsibility  matters  could  be 
identified: 

Child return procedure 

In  cases  of  parental  child  abduction  timing  is  key  to  the  successful  operation  of  the  child 
return procedure established in the Regulation. It appeared however that the immediate return 
of the child could not be ensured in all cases. Inefficiency of the  return  proceedings can be 
attributed to several aspects. The six-week time limit to issue a return order proved inadequate 
in practice since there are doubts among judges and practitioners whether the six weeks apply 
per  instance,  include  appeals  or  even  the  enforcement  of  a  return  decision.  In  addition,  the 
current  Regulation  sets  no  time  limit  for  the  processing  of  an  application  by  the  receiving 
Central  Authority.  Furthermore,  problems  in  meeting  the  deadline  have  been  attributed  in 
particular  to  the  lack  in  national  law  of  a  limitation  of  the  number  of  appeals  that  can  be 
brought  against  a  return  order.  Delays  in  handling  cases  were  also  caused  by  a  lack  of 
specialisation of the courts dealing with return applications in several Member States. These 
cross-border  abduction  cases  are  complex  and  sensitive  but  arise  only  infrequently  for  the 
individual judge when handled by every individual local family court. As a result judges are 
less familiar with the procedures and provisions involved and have less opportunity to liaise 
in a routine way with other EU jurisdictions in a manner favourable to the building of mutual 
trust. 

Finally,  the  so-called  “overriding  mechanism”  constitutes  an  addition  to  what  has  been 
provided for in the 1980 Hague Convention8 and is thought to have a stronger deterrent effect 
on the potential abducting parent. It lays down the procedure to be followed after a non-return 
order  was  issued  in  the  State  of  refuge  on  the  basis  of  Article  13  of  the  1980  Hague 
Convention.  The  practical  application  of  the  “overriding  mechanism”  has  proven  difficult 
because  the  custody  proceedings  do  not  take  place  in  the  Member  State  where  the  child  is 
present  and  because  the  abducting  parent  is  often  not  cooperative.  In  particular,  it  is  often 
difficult to hear the child. 

5 

6 

7 

8 

Council Regulation (EU) No 1259/2010 of 20 December 2010 implementing enhanced cooperation in 
the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation (OJ L 343, 29.12.2010, p. 10). 
Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition 
and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations (OJ L 7, 
10.0.2001, p. 1). 
On  3  March  2016,  the  Commission  presented  to  the  Council  a  Proposal  for  a  Council  Decision 
authorising  enhanced  cooperation  in  the  area  of  jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  decisions  on  the  property  regimes  of  international  couples,  covering  both  matters  of 
matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships, and submitted 
two implementing regulations. The Council adopted the Decision on 9 June 2016.  
Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (hereafter 
"the 1980 Hague Convention"). 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
Placement of the child in another Member State 

A court or authority envisaging the placement of a child in a foster family or an institution in 
another  Member  State  has  to  consult  the  authorities  of  that  State  before  ordering  the 
placement.  Central  Authorities  which  have  an  obligation  to  assist  courts  and  authorities  in 
arranging  cross-border  placements  have  regularly  reported  that  sometimes  it  takes  several 
months  until  it  is  established  whether  consent  is  required  in  a  particular  case.  If  consent  is 
required,  the  consultation  procedure  as  such  has  to  follow  and  is  reported  to  be  equally 
lengthy as there is no deadline for requested authorities to reply. As a result, in practice many 
requesting authorities order the placement and send the child to the receiving State while the 
consultation  procedure  is  still  pending  or  even  at  the  moment  it  is  initiated  because  they 
consider the placement as urgent and are aware of the length of proceedings. Receiving States 
therefore complained that children were often already placed before consent had been given, 
leaving the children in a situation of legal uncertainty. 

The requirement of exequatur 

The  procedure  for  declaring  a  decision  given  in  another  Member  State  enforceable 
("exequatur")  remains  an  obstacle  to  the  free  circulation  of  decisions  which  entails 
unnecessary  costs  and  delays  for  parents  and  their  children  involved  in  cross-border 
proceedings. The time for obtaining exequatur varies between the Member States; it can take 
from a couple of days to several months, depending on the jurisdiction and the complexity of 
the  case.  The  time  indicated  does  not  take  into  account  the  time  required  for  collecting  the 
documents  necessary  for  the  application  and  translations.  If  an  appeal  is  lodged  against  the 
grant or refusal of exequatur, this delay increases considerably: appeal proceedings can take 
up to two years in some Member States. This is particularly frustrating for parents who expect 
that decisions concerning children take effect without unnecessary delay. 

There might also be contradictory situations where a Member State must enforce access rights 
under the Regulation while, at the same time, the recognition and/or enforcement of custody 
rights  granted  in  the  same  decision  may  be  challenged  and  perhaps  refused  in  the  same 
Member State because decisions on both rights are  currently subject  to different procedures 
under the Regulation. 

Hearing of the child 

There are discrepancies in the interpretation of the grounds for non-recognition of decisions 
given  in  other  Member  States,  in  particular  in  relation  to  the  hearing  of  the  child.  The 
Regulation is based on the principle that children’s views must be taken into account in cases 
concerning  them  as  long  as  this  is  appropriate  in  light  of  their  age  and  maturity  and  in  line 
with their best interests. Difficulties arise due to the fact that Member States have diverging 
rules governing the hearing of the child. In particular, Member States with stricter standards 
regarding  the  hearing  of  the  child  than  the  Member  State  of  origin  of  the  decision  are 
encouraged by the current rules to refuse recognition and exequatur if the hearing of the child 
does  not  meet  their  own  standards.  In  addition,  the  importance  of  hearing  children  is  not 
highlighted  in  the  Regulation  in  general  terms  for  all  cases  on  matters  of  parental 
responsibility, but only in relation to return proceedings. If a decision is given without having 
heard the child, there is a danger that the decision may not take the best interests of the child 
into account to a sufficient extent. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

Actual enforcement of decisions 

Decisions on parental responsibility are often enforced late or not at all. Efficient enforcement 
depends on the national structures put in place to ensure enforcement. The legal and practical 
approach to the  enforcement of  family  decisions  varies  among Member States, in particular 
with regard to the enforcement measures taken. Once an order has been made, it is important 
to have effective measures available for enforcing it while it has to be borne in mind that for 
enforcement  against  children,  it  must  still  be  possible  to  react  quickly  to  any  temporary  or 
permanent risks to the child's best interests which might be caused by enforcement. 

Cooperation between the Central Authorities 

The  cooperation  between  Central  Authorities  in  specific  cases  on  parental  responsibility, 
contained  in  Article  55,  is  essential  to  support  effectively  parents  and  children  involved  in 
cross-border  proceedings  relating  to  child  matters.  A  problem  observed  by  all  stakeholders, 
including Member States, is the unclear drafting of the article setting out the assistance to be 
provided  by  Central  Authorities  in  specific  cases  on  parental  responsibility.  This  has  led  to 
delays  which  were  detrimental  to  children's  best  interests.  According  to  the  results  of  the 
consultation, the article does not constitute a sufficient legal basis for national authorities in 
some Member States to take action because their national law would require a more explicit 
autonomous legal basis in the Regulation. 

• 

Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area 

The  proposal  takes  account  of  other  instruments,  in  particular  other  EU  Regulations  in  the 
area  of  family  law  and  international  instruments  such  as  the  19809  and  199610  Hague 
Conventions. 

With  respect  to  the  parental  responsibility  matters  (custody,  access,  child  protection)  the 
courts of the Member States are bound by the jurisdiction rules of the Regulation. There are 
no other EU instruments dealing with this aspect. The aim of the 1980 Hague Convention is 
to  protect  the  jurisdiction  of  the  State  of  habitual  residence  of  the  child  in  cases  of  cross-
border  child  abduction.  Both  in  intra-EU  cases  and  cases  in  relation  to  third  States,  the  law 
applicable to parental responsibility matters is determined by the 1996 Hague Convention. 

In matrimonial matters, the Brussels IIa Regulation regulates the jurisdiction of the courts of 
the  Member  States  for  divorce,  legal  separation  and  the  annulment  of  marriages.  Rules  to 
determine which law applies to these questions are determined in accordance with the Rome 
III  Regulation,  established  as  an  instrument  of  enhanced  cooperation,  in  the  Member  States 
which apply it. 

The recognition and enforcement of decisions given in another Member State on matrimonial 
or parental responsibility matters are governed by the Brussels IIa Regulation. 

There  is  an  indirect  link  with  the  Maintenance  Regulation;  the  scope  of  the  latter  relates  to 
maintenance  obligations  arising  from  a  family  relationship  while  maintenance  is  excluded 
from the scope of the Brussels IIa Regulation. Pursuant to the Maintenance Regulation, courts 

9 
10 

Supra note 8. 
Hague Convention of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and 
Co-operation  in  Respect  of  Parental  Responsibility  and  Measures  for  the  Protection  of  Children 
(hereafter "the 1996 Hague Convention"). 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
having  jurisdiction  under  the  Brussels  IIa  Regulation  will  normally  also  have  ancillary 
jurisdiction for maintenance. 

2. 

• 

LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

Legal basis 

The legal basis for Union action in family matters is established in Article 81 (3) of the Treaty 
on the Functioning of the European Union. Article 81(1) states that the Union is to ‘develop 
judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross-border implications, based on the principle 
of mutual recognition of judgments and of decisions in extrajudicial cases’. 

• 

Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)  

The Union has shared competence under Article 81 TFEU which it has already exercised by 
enacting the Brussels IIa Regulation. The different elements of the proposal comply with the 
requirements  of  subsidiarity.  The  overriding  return  mechanism  of  the  Regulation  applies 
solely  to  cross-border  child  abduction  cases.  Improvements  undertaken  so  far  in  single 
Member States have proven not to have an impact on the return procedure as a whole since 
smooth  operation  of  the  system  presupposes  efficiency,  close  cooperation  and  mutual  trust 
between both Member States involved in a case. 

As regards placement decisions, in 2012 the Court of Justice ruled that “Member States are 
(…) required to establish clear rules and procedures for the purposes of the consent referred to 
in  Article  56  of  the  Regulation,  in  order  to  ensure  legal  certainty  and  expedition.  The 
procedures  must,  inter  alia,  enable  the  court  which  contemplates  the  placement  easily  to 
identify  the  competent  authority  and  the  competent  authority  to  grant  or  refuse  its  consent 
promptly.”  Nonetheless,  the  different  national  rules  are  not  implementing  the  provision  on 
cross-border  placements  in  a  coherent  and  uniform  manner  and  are  unlikely  to  do  so  in  the 
future. Even  if they  did, the necessary coordination between the national rules could  not be 
achieved at national level. Therefore only the creation of autonomous minimum rules in the 
Regulation, applicable to all cross-border placements originating from a court or authority in a 
Member State, can remedy this problem. 

The abolition of exequatur cannot be achieved by the Member States individually because the 
procedure  has  already  been  harmonised  by  the  Brussels  IIa  Regulation  and  can,  therefore, 
only be amended by way of a regulation. The same reasoning applies for the improvement of 
the existing rules on the cooperation between Member States' Central Authorities. 

With regard to enforcement which as such is a matter for the Member States, the CJEU has 
stated  that  the  application  of  national  rules  for  enforcement  should  not  prejudice  the  useful 
effect of the Regulation11. Article 81 para. 2 (f) allows at EU level the elimination of obstacles 
to the proper functioning of civil proceedings, if necessary by promoting the compatibility of 
the  rules  on  civil  procedure  applicable  in  the  Member  States.  In  addition,  a  minimum 
harmonisation  is  justified  to  reach  the  objective  of  mutual  recognition  of  decisions.  Where 
there are negative consequences resulting from inefficient enforcement procedures, these need 
to  be  addressed  at  EU  level  so  that  a  successful  outcome  can  be  equally  guaranteed  in  all 
Member States. 

11 

CJEU 11 July 2008, Case C-195/08 PPU – Inga Rinau, para. 82. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
• 

Proportionality 

The  proportionality  principle  requires  measures  taken  to  be  proportionate  to  the  size  and 
extent of the problems. 

National substantive rules will to some extent be affected by the proposed action, insofar as 
common  standards  on  enforcement  are  proposed.  This  is,  however,  justified  by  the  aim  of 
ensuring full efficiency of the Regulation and the fact that for individuals to be able to fully 
exercise  their  rights  wherever  they  might  be  in  the  Union,  the  incompatibilities  between 
judicial  and  administrative  systems  between  Member  States  have  to  be  removed.  The 
evaluation has shown indeed that national grounds of refusal on enforcement may duplicate 
with the existing refusal grounds under the Regulation. Because of the different standards for 
applying such grounds under the Regulation and under national law, national grounds may in 
reality  undermine  the  uniform  and  smooth  application  of  the  European  rules.  In  order  to 
ensure  uniformity  and  thus  to  create  a  level  playing  field  for  all  citizens  in  the  Union,  it  is 
therefore  necessary  to  harmonise  national  grounds  of  refusal  insofar  as  they  are  invoked 
against enforcement of a decision given in another Member State. 

There is a large and growing number of EU citizens that are affected directly and indirectly by 
cross-border child related proceedings. The costs of the proposal are modest and the benefits 
are, in comparison, very large. The proposal strengthens legal certainty, increases flexibility, 
ensures access to court and efficient proceedings whilst Member States retain full sovereignty 
with regard to the substantive laws on parental responsibility. 

• 

Choice of the instrument 

The  proposal  takes  the  form  of  a  Regulation  recasting  with  amendments  and  replacing  an 
existing one. 

3. 

• 

RESULTS 
CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

EX-POST 

EVALUATIONS, 

OF 

STAKEHOLDER 

Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation 

The evaluation of the Regulation was carried out in light of the objectives of the Regulatory 
Fitness  and  Performance  Programme  (REFIT)12.  This  is  the  Commission's  programme  to 
ensure  that  EU  legislation  is  fit  for  purpose  and  delivers  the  results  intended  by  EU  law 
makers. The evaluation of the Regulation is based on a qualitative and quantitative analysis. 
Empirical  data  was  collected  through  an  external  study;  see  Final  Evaluation  Report  and 
Analytical Annexes13 to evaluate the relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, as well as 
EU added value and utility of the Regulation. In addition, two surveys were launched in 2015 
to collect specific data concerning parental responsibility decisions.  

While the Regulation is considered to be functioning well overall and to be delivering value 
to EU citizens, the operational functioning of the instrument is at times hampered by a series 
of legal issues; the current legal text is insufficiently clear or is incomplete on some points14. 

12 
13 

14 

Better regulation for better results - An EU agenda, COM(2015) 215 final. 
Study on the assessment of Regulation (EC) 2201/2003 and the policy options for its amendment; see 
(Final  Evaluation  Report)  at  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil/files/bxl_iia_final_report_evaluation.pdf 
Annexes) 
and 
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil/files/bxl_iia_final_report_analtical_annexes.pdf. 
See in particular: Final Evaluation Report, p. 53. 

(Analytical 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
This is considered in particular the case for the child return procedure and for the cooperation 
between the Central Authorities on parental responsibility matters15. 

The  evaluation  showed  that  between  the  two  major  areas  covered  by  the  Regulation,  the 
matrimonial and parental responsibility matters, the latter were identified to have caused acute 
problems. The overall efficiency of certain aspects of the child-related proceedings has been 
called into question16. In matters concerning parental child abduction, cross-border placement 
of  children,  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  and  cooperation  between  (central  and 
other)  national  authorities  there  are  excessive  and  undue  delays  arising  from  the  way  the 
existing  procedures  are  formulated  or  applied17.  This  has  had  a  negative  impact  on  parent-
child relationships and the best interests of children. In addition, the requirement of exequatur 
generated average delays per case of several months and costs reaching up to 4,000 Euro for 
citizens18. The vague description of the cooperation between Central Authorities has often led 
to delays of several months or even to the non-fulfilment of requests19 – which is detrimental 
to  children's  welfare.  The  enforcement  of  decisions  given  in  another  Member  State  was 
identified as problematic20; decisions are often not enforced or only with significant delays. In 
addition,  the  work  of  specialised  lawyers  generates  costs  for  parents  between  € 1,000  and 
4,000  per  case21.  For  the  Member  States,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Regulation  itself  has 
generated very limited costs; these mainly relate to the operation of the Central Authorities22. 

• 

Stakeholder consultations 

This  proposal  was  preceded  by  an  extensive  consultation  of  the  interested  public,  Member 
States,  institutions  and  experts  on  the  existing  problems  of  the  current  system  and  possible 
solutions to it. On 15 April 2014, the Commission adopted a report on the application of the 
Regulation23 and launched  a public  consultation  in which it put forward suggestions for the 
revision  on  which  a  total  of  193  responses  was  received24.  It  results  from  the  consultation 
process  that  stakeholders  support  the  need  for  a  carefully  targeted  reform  of  the  existing 
Regulation. 

In  cases  concerning  parental  child  abduction,  the  majority  of  respondents  to  the  public 
consultation think that the immediate return of the child within the EU was not ensured in all 
cases.  The  main  suggestions  for  improvement  arose  with  respect  to  a  stricter  time-frame 
compliance and applying sanctions in cases where the obligation to return the child was not 
fulfilled25. 

While parents are the most prominent group who sought to expand the abolition of exequatur, 
followed by judges and lawyers, some Member States indicated that exequatur should not be 
abolished  without  maintaining  certain  safeguards.  It  was  recommended  that  in  case  of 

15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 

See in particular: Impact Assessment, p. 11. 
See in particular: Final Evaluation Report, p. 57. 
See in particular: Impact Assessment, p. 36, 37, 52, 60 and 86. 
See in particular: Impact Assessment, p. 61. 
See in particular: Analytical Annexes, p. 92. 
See in particular: Analytical Annexes, p. 65. 
See in particular: Impact Assessment, p. 87. 
See in particular: Analytical Annexes, p. 265. 
COM(2014) 225 final. 
The summary of the responses to the public consultation is contained in the Analytical Annexes, p. 127. 
Analytical Annexes, p. 151. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
abolition  of  exequatur  safeguards  be  put  in  place  in  relation  to  areas  such  as  the  rights  of 
parties and the child to be heard and the proper service of documents26. 

A  significant  number  of  respondents  considered  enforcement  of  parental  responsibility 
decisions which were given in another Member State as an important area for improvement. 
The  main  suggestion  from  legal  practitioners  involved  the  adoption  of  common  minimum 
standards  including  a  uniform  enforcement  procedure  while  Member  States  were  sceptical 
towards such a solution27. 

Finally, parents have particularly expressed their concern as regards the cooperation between 
the  Central  Authorities  whose  statutory  role  is  to  support  them  in  cross-border  child-related 
proceedings.  Lack  of  efficient  cooperation  was  a  main  feature  of  most  of  the  respondents’ 
answers. To resolve this, the respondents recommend a better clarification of the tasks so to 
better  support  the  parents.  Similarly,  respondents  supported  the  inclusion  of  child  welfare 
authorities into the cooperation system to ensure the smooth operation of the Regulation28. 

The outcome of the public consultation confirms in general the findings of the Commission's 
application report adopted in 2014. 

• 

Collection and use of expertise 

The  availability  and  completeness  of  the  statistics  on  the  application  of  the  Regulation  is 
limited and differs widely across Member States. The qualitative and quantitative analysis of 
the operation of the Regulation was carried out through an external study. In addition to the 
study,  two  surveys  –  one  with  the  Central  Authorities  established  under  the  Regulation  and 
another one with Member States – were launched in 2015 to collect specific data concerning 
parental responsibility decisions. In addition, a separate expert group was constituted with a 
view to discussing  problems  and  potential solutions for the revision. The functioning of the 
Regulation  was  also  regularly  discussed  in  several  meetings  of  the  Central  Authorities 
organised  in  the  framework  of  the  European  Judicial  Network  in  civil  and  commercial 
matters. 

• 

Impact assessment 

In  the  Impact  Assessment  accompanying  this  proposal,  the  policy  options  and  their  impact 
assessment were dealt with separately for each of the issues identified as problematic in the 
evaluation of the  Regulation.  For all issues  a baseline  scenario and alternative options were 
developed. For matrimonial and parental responsibility matters, policy options with different 
degrees  of  intervention  were  considered.  For  the  child  abduction  procedure,  mere 
clarifications  of  the  current  mechanism  alongside  an  option  foreseeing  a  list  of  flanking 
measures  were  taken  into  consideration.  In  addition,  two  options  were  developed  to  assess 
possible  radical  changes  of  the  return  mechanism  (a  return  to  the  "Hague"  system  and  a 
creation of a unique forum in the Member State of origin). For the placement mechanism, two 
options were proposed to choose between a system either with presumed or explicit consent. 
With  regard  to  recognition  and  enforcement,  both  main  policy  options  do  away  with  the 
exequatur  requirement  or  propose  a  new  procedure  to  respond  best  to  the  inefficiency 
problem.  The  new  proposed  system  was  supplemented  by  three  alternative  sub-options 
tackling the problem of hearing the child. Also, two complementary options were considered 

26 
27 
28 

Analytical Annexes, p. 153. 
Analytical Annexes, p. 156. 
Analytical Annexes, p. 159. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
to  improve  enforcement  either  through  an  indicative  time-limit  or  through  a  full 
harmonisation of the enforcement law for parental responsibility decisions. 

The assessment finishes with the comprehensive preferred options for all issues presented in 
the  report.  For  matrimonial  matters,  the  preferred  policy  option  is  retaining  the  status  quo. 
This  means  that  spouses  in  an  international  marriage  will  continue  to  have  a  possibility  to 
consolidate  the  different  proceedings  as  currently  permitted  by  the  Regulation  and  other 
family  law  instruments  (such  as  the  Maintenance  Regulation).  At  the  same  time,  the 
flexibility for the spouses to apply for a divorce in one of the fora indicated in the Regulation 
will be maintained. The benefits of reducing or abolishing this flexibility (favoured by some 
Member  States)  would  be  outweighed  by  the  disadvantages  of  the  options  considered  to 
respond  to  the  "rush  to  court"  problem  (transfer  of  jurisdiction  or  hierarchy  of  grounds) 
signalled by  other  Member  States. Also, spouses not having a common EU  nationality who 
live in a third State but retain links with a certain Member State and want to get divorced will 
continue to rely on the national rules to access EU courts or to have their decision (obtained in 
a third country) recognised in the EU. 

With regard to parental responsibility matters, the preferred option is for an EU intervention 
as  motivated  by  the  scale  and  urgency  of  the  problem.  More  specifically,  the  child  return 
procedure  should  be  improved  through  an  option  clarifying  the  current  mechanism  and 
introducing  new  measures  such  as  concentration  of  jurisdiction  and  the  possibility  for  the 
court of refuge to order urgent protective measures which can also "travel with the child" to 
the State of habitual residence if necessary to enable a safe return. The new rules would make 
the  time  limit  for  the  return  achievable  by  specifying  the  time  frame  for  the  proceedings 
before the courts of the first and second instance separately. Proceedings would be shortened 
by  introducing  a  time  limit  also  for  the  requested  Central  Authority,  and  by  limiting  the 
number  of appeals  possible against a decision on return or non-return to one. The preferred 
option  would  explicitly  invite  the  judge  to  consider  whether  the  decision  should  be 
provisionally enforceable. 

For  placement  decisions  an  autonomous  consent  procedure  should  be  established  to  be 
applied to all cross-border placements, flanked by a time limit for the requested Member State 
to respond to the request. 

Exequatur  would  be  abolished  while  maintaining  appropriate  safeguards  (grounds  for  non-
recognition  and  challenges  against  enforcement  as  such  or  against  specific  enforcement 
measures)  to  be  invoked  jointly  by  the  defendant  parent  at  the  stage  of  enforcement  in  the 
Member State of enforcement, thereby shortening the overall duration of the proceedings. To 
diminish  problems  resulting  from  different  national  practices  for  hearing  children  and  from 
decisions issued by courts lacking a close connection with the child at the time of decision, 
and  the  resulting  refusals  of  the  recognition  of  the  decision,  the  preferred  option  would 
require Member States to mutually respect their national rules while obliging them to give the 
child the opportunity to express his or her views and take due account of them, and bring the 
jurisdiction  in  line  with  the  guiding  principle  of  proximity  to  the  child  by  nuancing 
perpetuatio  fori.  As  far  as  enforcement  is  concerned,  the  preferred  option  would  guarantee 
that enforcement could only be refused on the basis of a uniform and limited list of grounds 
for  refusal.  There  would  also  be  a  time  limit  indicated  for  enforcement  with  a  reporting 
obligation  where  this  is  surpassed  and  the  possibility  for  the  court  of  origin  to  declare  a 
decision  provisionally  enforceable  notwithstanding  any  appeal  against  the  decision  while 
leaving leeway to deal with urgent risks to the child's best interests at the enforcement stage, 

EN 

10 

   EN 

which would in turn clearly enhance the efficiency of the proceedings and the protection of 
the best interests of the child. 

With regard to cooperation, a clarification of the respective article should specify: (1) who can 
ask  (2)  which  assistance  or  information  (3)  from  whom  and  (4)  under  which  conditions.  A 
time limit would be indicated for the requested authority to respond. It would be made clear 
that also courts and child welfare authorities can request the assistance of Central Authorities. 
In addition, the well-established soft law measures would be continued to provide an ongoing 
supporting structure for those handling applications under the Regulation. The addition of the 
proposed article on adequate resources would render explicit the current implicit requirement 
which  is  presently  met  in  the  case  of  certain  Central  Authorities,  but  not  all,  and  would 
thereby increase mutual trust. 

The  preferred  package  of  policy  options  for  parental  responsibility  matters  would  meet  the 
simplification objectives by reducing delays relating to the return of the child, the placement 
decisions, and cooperation between the Central Authorities, and eliminate unnecessary delays 
and costs related to the exequatur requirement. At the same time it would also respond to the 
urgency  of  remedying  the  problems  currently  faced  in  this  area,  where  it  is  of  outmost 
importance  to  act  and  set  the  scene  for  changes  keeping  in  mind  the  situation  of  children, 
families and their best interests. 

The efficiency of the proceedings would be improved, as regards the child return procedure, 
by  reducing  the  number  of  levels  of  appeal,  providing  for  provisional  enforceability  of 
decisions  where  appropriate,  by  defining  the  role  and  duties  of  Central  Authorities  more 
clearly and obliging Member States to concentrate jurisdiction in a limited number of courts 
in  a  manner  coherent  with  the  structure  of  their  respective  legal  system.  For  placement 
decisions, the delays with obtaining consent will be reduced by establishing an autonomous 
consent procedure and by a time limit (max. eight weeks as opposed to the current 6 months 
and more) for the requested Member State to respond to the request. As regards recognition 
and enforcement, delays relating to obtaining exequatur (taking up to several months) will be 
eliminated.  As  the  safeguards  (grounds  for  non-recognition  and  challenges  against 
enforcement as such or against specific enforcement measures) would be invoked jointly by 
the defendant at the stage of enforcement, the  overall duration of the proceedings would be 
shortened.  Similarly,  the  preferred  option  would  reduce  delays  (in  some  instances  going 
beyond one year) during the actual enforcement by establishing a maximum time frame of six 
weeks. Finally, the clarification of the role of Central Authorities in general will reduce delays 
in their mutual cooperation. 

• 

Regulatory fitness and simplification 

Having recourse to the legal technique of recasting, improving the operational functioning of 
the  instrument  by  making  it  clearer  and  more  complete  as  well  as  simplification  and 
improving  efficiency  will  also  contribute  to  regulatory  fitness.  In  particular,  establishing  an 
autonomous consent procedure and a time limit for the requested Member State to respond to 
the request will shorten the time for obtaining consent in the placement procedures to max. 8 
weeks  instead  of  the  current  6  months  or  more.  With  the  proposed  abolition  of  exequatur, 
delays (taking up to several months) and costs (up to € 4,000) relating to obtaining it would be 
eliminated. The proposed amended procedure for the return of the child in case of abduction 
would reduce the costs of specialised legal advice for parents (between € 1,000 and 4,000)29. 

29 

Impact Assessment, p. 61. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

                                                 
• 

Fundamental rights 

All elements of the reform respect the rights set out in the Charter of Fundamental rights, in 
particular,  the  right  to  an  effective  remedy  and  the  right  to  a  fair  trial  guaranteed  in  its 
Article 47.  Given  the  subject  matter  of  the  Regulation,  notably  the  relationship  between 
parents and their children, the preferred policy options for parental responsibility matters will 
enhance the right to the respect for private and family life (Article 7). Finally, the proposed 
changes will strengthen the rights of the child (Article 24) and bring the Regulation further in 
line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child by linking the provisions 
more closely to it. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

The proposal triggers relatively modest compliance costs. The abolition of exequatur and the 
concentration  of  jurisdiction  would  require  Member  States  to  incur  costs  for  training  to 
familiarise  the  legal  profession  with  the  new  procedures  envisaged.  Training  is  however 
already necessary today. In addition, as the Regulation foresees a concentration of jurisdiction 
in the future, fewer judges will need to be trained. Experience in Member States which have 
concentrated  jurisdiction,  on  the  other  hand,  has  shown  that  judges  hearing  more  abduction 
cases are more likely to participate in any training that is offered, and the decisions by those 
specialised  and  experienced  first  instance  courts  are  appealed  less  frequently,  thereby 
generating cost savings in the individual case and for the administration of justice in general. 
Member States are also already now obliged to designate and ensure the proper functioning of 
their Central Authorities to enable them to carry out the obligations assigned to them under 
this  Regulation.  Further  clarification  of  their  tasks  might  generate  additional  costs  (in 
particular for human resources) for some Member States if their Central Authorities currently 
are not sufficiently equipped.. 

The  other  changes  envisaged  constitute  relatively  straightforward  changes  to  existing  rules 
which would not require the creation of new procedures and should be able to be applied by 
the authorities without the need of special training. 

5. 

• 

OTHER ELEMENTS 

Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements 

In order to monitor the effective application of the amended Regulation, regular reporting and 
ex post evaluation by the Commission will take place supported by consultations of Member 
States, stakeholders and external experts. Regular expert meetings will be organised to discuss 
application problems and exchange best practices between Member States in the framework 
of the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters. The cooperation with the 
latter  will  be  particularly  useful  to  formulate  the  need  for  the  collection  of  specific  data  to 
underpin any future proposal by statistical evidence. 

• 

Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal 

Introduction  of  measures  increasing  efficiency  and  improving  the  functioning  of  the 
"overriding mechanism" 

Several substantial modifications are proposed with the aim of improving the efficiency of the 
return  of  an  abducted  child  and  the  problems  relating  to  the  complexity  of  the  "overriding 
mechanism" under the Regulation. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

First of all, the proposal clarifies the time limit for issuing an enforceable return order in line 
with  the  view  prevailing  among  those  Member  States  which  handle  return  cases  under  the 
1980  Hague  Convention  most  quickly.  A  separate  six-week  time  limit  would  apply  to  the 
proceedings before the first instance court  and  the  appellate  court,  respectively.  In  addition, 
the  proposal  would  oblige  Central  Authorities  to  also  work  under  a  six-week  time  limit  to 
receive  and  process  the  application;  locate  the  respondent  and  the  child;  promote  mediation 
while  making  sure  that  this  does  not  delay  the  proceedings,  and  refer  the  applicant  to  a 
qualified  lawyer  or  file  the  case  with  the  court  (depending  on  the  national  legal  system). 
Currently,  no  time  limit  exists  for  Central  Authorities.  This  new  6+6+6  deadline  therefore 
envisages  a  maximum  period  of  18  weeks  for  all  possible  stages  instead  of  average 
proceedings  taking  up  to  165  days  nowadays30.  This  would  render  the  time  limit  for  courts 
more realistic with a view to protecting the right of the defendant to a fair trial whilst limiting 
it to the shortest period realistically possible. 

Moreover,  the  measures  proposed  include  an  obligation  for  Member  States  to  concentrate 
jurisdiction  for  child  abduction  cases  in  a  limited  number  of  courts  while  respecting  the 
structure of the legal system concerned. This would ensure that judges experienced with this 
very specific type of procedure would rule on the return applications. 

The  proposal  limits  the  number  of  possibilities  to  appeal  a  decision  on  return  to  one  and 
explicitly  invites  a  judge  to  consider  whether  a  decision  ordering  return  should  be 
provisionally enforceable. 

In addition, the proposal contains a number of clarifications to better implement the current 
rules: it obliges the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before 
the wrongful removal or retention to conduct a thorough examination of the best interests of 
the  child  before  a  final  custody  decision,  possibly  implying  return  of  the  child,  is  given.  In 
this  context,  when  conducting  this  examination  of  the  best  interests  of  the  child,  any  child 
who  is  capable  of  forming  his  or  her  own  views  has  the  right  to  be  heard,  even  if  not 
physically present, using alternative means such as videoconferencing as appropriate. 

The cooperation between the Central Authorities or a direct communication by a judge with 
the relevant court in the Member State of origin should be facilitated to assess measures ("ad-
equate arrangements") put in place in the Member State to which the child should be returned. 

Where  the  child  might  be  at  a  grave  risk  of  harm  or  might  otherwise  be  placed  in  an 
intolerable  situation  if  returned  to  the  country  of  the  child’s  habitual  residence  without  any 
safeguards,  it  should  also  be  possible  for  the  court  of  the  Member  State  of  refuge  to  order 
urgent  protective  measures  required  there  and which,  if  necessary,  can  also  "travel  with  the 
child"  to  the  State  of  habitual  residence  where  a  final  decision  on  the  substance  has  to  be 
taken. Such an urgent measure would be recognised by operation of law in the Member State 
where the child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention 
but would lapse as soon as the courts of that State have taken the measures required by the 
situation. For example, the court before which return proceedings are pending will be able to 
grant access rights to one of the parents which will also be enforceable in the Member State of 
habitual  residence  of  the  child  until  the  court  of  that  country  takes  a  final  decision  with 
respect to the access to a child. 

30 
Statistical analysis of applications made in 2008 under the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on 
the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction — Part II ― Regional Report, Prel. Doc. No 8 B ― update of 
November  2011  for  the  attention  of  the  Special  Commission  of  June  2011,  p. 10-12,  available  at 
https://assets.hcch.net/upload/wop/abduct2011pd08be.pdf. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

                                                 
Creation of an autonomous consent procedure to be applied to all cross-border placements, 
flanked  by  a  time  limit  of  eight  weeks  for  the  requested  Member  State  to  respond  to  the 
request 

The  proposal  concerning  cross-border  placements  foresees  the  introduction  of  the  following 
new rules: 

–  Making  consent  of  the  receiving  State  mandatory  for  all  cross-border 

placements originating from a court or authority in a Member State 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Introducing  uniform  requirements  for  documents  to  be  submitted  with  the 
request for consent: the requesting authority has to submit a report on the child 
and set out the reasons for the contemplated cross-border placement 

Introducing  a  rule  on  translation  requirements:  the  request  has  to  be 
accompanied by a translation into the language of the requested Member State 

Channelling all requests through Central Authorities 

Introducing a time limit of eight weeks for the requested State to decide about 
the request. 

Abolition of exequatur with appropriate safeguards to be invoked at the stage of enforcement, 
i.e. to challenge the recognition or enforcement of the decision given by the State of origin or 
to  challenge  concrete  enforcement  measures  ordered  by  the  State  where  enforcement  is 
sought, in one and the same procedure in the State where enforcement is sought 

Today,  judicial  cooperation  and  the  level  of  trust  among  Member  States  have  reached  a 
degree  of  maturity  which  permits  the  move  towards  a  simpler  and  less  costly  system  of 
circulation  of  decisions,  removing  the  existing  formalities  among  Member  States.  Such 
abolition of exequatur has already been realised in a number of areas, including in the family 
law  area  (access  rights,  certain  return  orders,  maintenance  obligations).  As  a  substantial 
change, the proposal therefore abolishes the exequatur procedure for all decisions covered by 
the  Regulation's  scope.  The  abolition  of  exequatur  will  be  accompanied  by  procedural 
safeguards  which  ensure  that  the  defendant's  right  to  an  effective  remedy  and  the  right  to  a 
fair trial as guaranteed in Article 47 of the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights are adequately 
protected.  The  abolition  of  exequatur  would  allow  the  European  citizens  engaged  in  cross-
border  litigation  to  save  the  major  part  of  the  current  costs  of  the  procedure  (on  average 
€ 2,200 to be paid for processing the application) and eliminate delays, which in some cases 
amount to a couple of months. 

The  defendant  parent  would  have  remedies  at  his/her  disposal  by  which  he  or  she  could  in 
exceptional circumstances prevent a decision given in one Member State from taking effect in 
another Member State. Where there is a concern that any of the grounds of non-recognition or 
grounds to challenge concrete enforcement measures might apply, the defendant could make 
an  application  to  challenge  recognition  and/or  enforcement  in  the  Member  State  of 
enforcement in one and the same procedure. 

The  proposal  includes  uniform  rules  to  define  in  which  situations  not  only  cross-border 
enforceability but also enforcement as such could be opposed. The latter rules would govern 
for  example  the  situation  where  a  change  of  circumstances  occurred.  In  addition,  the  rules 
settle  in  unified  manner  situations  where  the  child  opposes  enforcement  or  enforcement 
cannot be carried out due to temporary factual obstacles. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

As  such,  the  time  and  costs  of  the  exequatur  procedure  will  be  saved  while  the  necessary 
protection of defendants will remain ensured. 

As it is already the case under the current Regulation, the proposal also contains a series of 
standard  certificates  which  aim  at  facilitating  the  recognition  or  enforcement  of  the  foreign 
decision  in  the  absence  of  the  exequatur  procedure.  These  certificates  will  facilitate  the 
enforcement of the decision by the competent authorities and reduce the need for a translation 
of the decision. 

Introduction of an obligation to give the child an opportunity to express his or her views 

The proposal leaves Member States' rules and practices on how to hear a child untouched, but 
requires mutual recognition between the legal systems. This means that an obligation to give 
the  child  who  is  capable  of  forming  his  or  her  own  views  an  opportunity  to  express  these 
views would be made explicit in the Regulation, bearing in mind that all Member States have 
ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which already obliges them to hear the 
children  meeting  the  condition  mentioned  above  in  any  domestic  and  cross-border 
proceedings concerning them. Notably a distinction is made, as it is the case in the respective 
Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, between the question when the child needs to 
be  given  the  opportunity  to  be  heard  on  the  one  hand  (i.e.  when  he  or  she  is  capable  of 
forming/expressing his or her own views) and the question what weight the judge shall give to 
the child's views on the other hand (which depends on the age and maturity of the child). This 
distinction has to be recorded in the decision and in a certificate annexed to it. For a parent 
seeking  recognition  of  a  decision  on  another  Member  State,  this  means  that  a  court  in  that 
country will not refuse to recognise it on the mere fact that a hearing of the child in another 
country was done differently comparing to the standards applied by that court. 

Introduction of targeted measures to improve the efficiency of actual enforcement 

To tackle the problem of inefficient enforcement, the proposal introduces several measures. It 
provides that the application for enforcement has to be made to a court in the Member State of 
enforcement  but  leaves  the  procedure  generally,  the  means  of  enforcement  and  their 
modalities up to the law of the Member State of enforcement, e.g. which specific enforcement 
measure  should  be  ordered  under  which  circumstances.  Where  a  decision  from  another 
Member  State  needs  to  be  further  detailed  or  adapted  in  order  to  be  enforced  under  the 
national law of the Member State of enforcement, the competent court of that Member State 
should  make  the  necessary  specifications  or  adaptations  while  respecting  the  essential 
elements of the decision. 

A party challenging the enforcement of a decision given in another Member State should, to 
the extent possible and in accordance with the legal system of the Member State addressed, be 
able to invoke, in the same procedure, in addition to the grounds for refusal of recognition, the 
grounds  for  refusal  against  enforcement  as  such.  The  incompatibility  with  the  child's  best 
interests  which  has  been  caused  by  a  change  of  circumstances  (such  as  serious  illness  of  a 
child) or by the strength of the objections of a child of sufficient age and maturity should only 
be considered if it reaches an importance comparable to the public policy exception. 

The proposal also foresees an indicative time limit for the actual enforcement of a decision. In 
case  the  enforcement  has  not  occurred  after  the  lapse  of  6  weeks  from  the  moment  the 
enforcement proceedings were initiated, the court of the Member State of enforcement would 
have  to  inform  the  requesting  Central  Authority  in  the  Member  State  of  origin  (or  the 

EN 

15 

   EN 

applicant, if the proceedings were conducted without Central Authority assistance) about this 
fact and the reasons for the lack of timely enforcement. 

The proposal further provides that the court of origin could declare a decision provisionally 
enforceable even if this possibility does not exist in its national law. This is useful in systems 
where the decision is not yet enforceable while it is still subject to appeal. As a result, a parent 
would  be  able  to  have  access  to  the  child  based  on  a  decision  provisionally  declared 
enforceable  while  the  appeal  proceedings  concerning  that  decision  will  be  carried  out  on 
request of the other parent. 

Clarification of the Central Authorities' and other requested authorities’ tasks plus addition 
of an article on adequate resources 

The  proposal  clarifies  the  following  aspects:  (1)  who  can  ask  (2)  which  assistance  or 
information  (3)  from  whom  and  (4)  under  which  conditions.  It  makes  clear  that  also  courts 
and child welfare authorities can request the assistance of Central Authorities. Moreover, with 
respect  to  the  transmission  of  social  reports,  the  proposal  clarifies  to  cover  also  reports  on 
adults or siblings which are of relevance in child-related proceedings under the Regulation if 
the  situation  of  the  child  so  requires.  It  makes  clear  that  this  is  (for  courts)  a  cost-free 
alternative  (except  for  possible  translation  costs)  to  the  Evidence  Regulation  and  creates  a 
legal  basis  for  child  welfare  authorities  to  obtain  the  necessary  information  from  other 
Member  States  through  the  Central  Authorities.  The  request  is  to  be  accompanied  by  a 
translation into the language of the requested State. Likewise, the proposal establishes some 
minimum  requirements  for  a  request  for  a  social  report,  namely  a  description  of  the 
proceedings  for  which  it  is  needed  and  the  factual  situation  that  gave  rise  to  those 
proceedings. The proposal establishes a time limit for the requested authority to respond. As 
concerns  the  requested  national  authority,  e.g.  when  a  social  report  is  asked  for,  the 
Regulation makes clear that the requested authority is under an autonomous obligation created 
by the Regulation to provide such report, without any additional requirements existing under 
the national law of the requested State having to be met. For example, a court in a Member 
State,  before  making  its  decision  on  taking  a  child  into  care  who  is  currently  present  in  its 
jurisdiction, may obtain information through Central Authority channels on whether there are 
pending  proceedings  in  another  country  and  ask  for  copies  of  any  decisions  ordering 
protective measures for other children from the same family, and for any social reports on the 
siblings and their relationship with each other, or on the parent, which are of relevance for the 
pending proceedings. 

In addition, the proposal states that Member States shall ensure that Central Authorities have 
adequate financial and human resources to enable them to carry out the obligations assigned 
to them under this Regulation. 

The  proposal  does  not  contain  any  changes  with  regard  to  the  scope  and  the  matrimonial 
matters for which the status quo is retained. This means that Chapter I (with the exception of 
mere  clarification  in  definitions)  and  Chapter  II  Section  1  (except  for  clarification  of  the 
Articles 6 and 7) remain unchanged. 

As a consequence, spouses in an international marriage will continue to have a possibility to 
consolidate  the  different  proceedings  as  foreseen  in  the  Regulation  and  other  family  law 
instruments  (such  as  the  Maintenance  Regulation).  At  the  same  time,  the  flexibility  for 
spouses  to  apply  for  a  divorce  in  one  of  the  fora  indicated  in  the  Regulation  will  be 
maintained. Spouses not having a common EU nationality who live in a third State but retain 

EN 

16 

   EN 

links  with  a  certain  Member  State  and  want  to  get  divorced  will  continue  to  rely  on  the 
national  rules  to  access  EU  courts  or  to  have  their  decision  (obtained  in  a  third  country) 
recognised in the EU.  

Furthermore, the following Articles remain unchanged in the meaning of a Recast: 1, 2, 3, 4, 
5, 6, 7, 8(2), 9, 10, 11(1), (2), (3), (5), (7), 12(2), (4), 13,14, 15(1)-(5), 16, 17, 18, 19, 20(2), 
21(1), (2), (4), 22, 23(a), (c)-(f), 24, 25, 26, 27, 41(2), 42(2), 44, 48, 49, 51, 53, 54, 55(b)-(e), 
56 (2), (3), 58, 59(1), 60(a)-(d), 63, 66, 67 (a), (b). 

EN 

17 

   EN 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 
2016/0190 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

concerning ⌦ on ⌫ jurisdiction, and the recognition and enforcement of judgments 
⌦ decisions ⌫ in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, 
⌦ and on international child abduction ⌫ repealing Regulation (EC) No 
1347/2000(recast) 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community ⌦ on the Functioning of 
the  European  Union ⌫  ,  and  in  particular  Article 61(c)  and  Article  67(1)  ⌦ 81(3) ⌫ 
thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal from the ⌦ European ⌫ Commission31, 

(cid:214) After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,  
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament32, 
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee33, 

Acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(cid:216) new 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201/200334  has  been  substantially  amended35.  Since 
further amendments are to be made, that Regulation should be recast in the interests of 
clarity. 

This Regulation establishes uniform jurisdiction rules for divorce, separation and the 
annulment of marriage as well as rules for disputes about parental responsibility with 
an international element. It facilitates the free circulation of decisions in the Union by 
laying down provisions on their recognition and enforcement in other Member States. 

OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201/2003  of  27  November  2003  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental 
responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1). 
See Annex V. 

(1) 

(2) 

31 
32 
33 
34 

35 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 1 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(3)  (cid:214) The smooth and correct functioning of a Union area of justice with respect for the 
Member  States'  different  legal  systems  and  traditions  is  vital  for  the  Union.  In  that 
regard,  mutual  trust  in  one  another's  justice  systems  should  be  further  enhanced.  
The European Community ⌦ Union ⌫ has set ⌦ itself ⌫ the objective of creating 
⌦ , maintaining and developing ⌫ an area of freedom, security and justice, in which 
the  free  movement  of  persons ⌦ and  access  to  justice  are ⌫  is  ensured.  (cid:214) With  a 
view to implementing those objectives, the rights of persons, notably children, in legal 
proceedings should be reinforced in order to facilitate the cooperation of judicial and 
administrative authorities and the enforcement of decisions in family law matters with 
cross-border implications. The mutual recognition of decisions in civil matters should 
be  enhanced,  access  to  justice  should  be  simplified  and  exchanges  of  information 
between the authorities of the Member States should be improved upon.  

(4) 

(5) 

To this end, the Community ⌦ Union ⌫ is to adopt, among others, measures in the 
field  of  judicial  cooperation  in  civil  matters  (cid:214) having  cross-border  implications, 
particularly  when   that  are  necessary  for  the  proper  functioning  of  the  internal 
market. 

(cid:216) new 

In order to attain the objective of free circulation of decisions in matrimonial matters 
and  matters  of  parental  responsibility,  it  is  necessary  and  appropriate  that  the  rules 
governing jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of decisions be governed 
by a legal instrument of the Union which is binding and directly applicable. 

The  Tampere  European  Council  endorsed  the  principle  of  mutual  recognition  of  judicial 
decisions as the cornerstone for the creation of a genuine judicial area, and identified visiting 
rights as a priority. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 2 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 3 (adapted) 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/200036  sets  out  rules  on  jurisdiction,  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  matters  of  parental  responsibility  for 
the  children  of  both  spouses  rendered  on  the  occasion  of  the  matrimonial  proceedings.  The 
content of this Regulation was substantially taken over from the Convention of 28 May 1998 
on the same subject matter37. 

36 
37 

OJ L 160, 30.6.2000, p. 19. 
At the time of the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 the Council took note of the explanatory 
report concerning that Convention prepared by Professor Alegria Borras (OJ C 221, 16.7.1998, p. 27). 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
On  3  July  2000  France  presented  an  initiative  for  a  Council  Regulation  on  the  mutual 
enforcement of judgments on rights of access to children38. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 4 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 5 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(6) 

In  order  to  ensure  equality  for  all  children,  this  Regulation ⌦ should ⌫  covers  all 
decisions on parental responsibility, including measures for the protection of the child 
⌦ children ⌫ , independently of any link with a matrimonial proceeding (cid:214) or other 
proceedings  . 

(7) 

Since the application of the rules on parental responsibility often arises in the context 
of  matrimonial  proceedings, ⌦ however, ⌫  it  is  more  appropriate  to  have  a  single 
instrument for matters of divorce and parental responsibility. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 6 (adapted) 

The scope of this Regulation covers civil matters, whatever the nature of the court or tribunal. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 7 (adapted) 

(8) 

(9) 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 8 (adapted) 

As  regards  judgments  ⌦ decisions ⌫  on  divorce,  legal  separation  or  marriage 
annulment,  this  Regulation  should  apply  only  to  the  dissolution  of  matrimonial  ties 
and  should  not  deal  with  issues  such  as  the  grounds  for  divorce,  property 
consequences of the marriage or any other ancillary measures. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 9 (adapted) 

As regards the property of the child, this Regulation should apply only to measures for 
the  protection  of  the  child,  i.e.  (i) ⌦ namely ⌫  the  designation  and  functions  of  a 
person  or  body  having  charge  of  the  child's  property,  representing  or  assisting  the 
child,  and  (ii)  the  administration,  conservation  or  disposal  of  the  child's  property.  In 
this context, this Regulation should, for instance, apply in cases where the parents are 
in  dispute  as  regards  the  administration  of  ⌦ object  of  the  proceedings  is  the 
designation  of  a  person  or  body  administering ⌫  the  child's  property.  Measures 
relating to the child's property which do not concern the protection of the child should 
continue 
(EC)  No 44/2001  of 
22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments 

to  be  governed  by  Council  Regulation 

38 

OJ C 234, 15.8.2000, p. 7. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
in  civil  and  commercial  matters39  Regulation  (EU)  No  1215/2012  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council40. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 10 (adapted) 

(10)  This Regulation is not intended to apply to matters relating to social security, public 
measures of a general nature in matters of education or health or to decisions on the 
right of asylum and on immigration. In addition it does ⌦ should ⌫ not apply to the 
establishment  of  parenthood,  since  this  is  a  different  matter  from  the  attribution  of 
parental  responsibility,  nor  to  other  questions  linked  to  the  status  of  persons. 
Moreover,  it  does  not  apply  to  measures  taken  as  a  result  of  criminal  offences 
committed by children. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 11 (adapted) 

(11)  Maintenance  obligations  are  excluded  from  the  scope  of  this  Regulation  as  these 
⌦ those obligations ⌫ are already covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 
4/200941. The courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ having jurisdiction under this Regulation will 
generally  have  jurisdiction  to  rule  on  ⌦ ancillary ⌫  maintenance  obligations  by 
application  of  point (d)  of  Article  5(2)  3  of  ⌦ that ⌫  Council  Regulation 
No 44/2001. 

(cid:216) new 

(12)  This Regulation should apply to all children up to the age of 18 years like the Hague 
Convention  of  19 October  1996  on  Jurisdiction,  Applicable  Law,  Recognition, 
Enforcement and Cooperation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for 
the  Protection  of  Children  ('the  1996  Hague  Convention').  This  should  avoid  an 
overlap  with  the  scope  of  the  Hague  Convention  of  13 January  2000  on  the 
International  Protection  of  Adults  which  applies  from  the  age  of  18 years  onwards. 
The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child 
Abduction  ('the  1980  Hague  Convention'),  and  consequently  also  Chapter III  of  this 
Regulation which governs the application of the 1980 Hague Convention in relations 
between  Member  States,  should  continue  to  apply  to  children  up  to  the  age  of  16 
years. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 12 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(13)  The  grounds  of  jurisdiction  in  matters  of  parental  responsibility  established  in  the 
present  Regulation  are  shaped  in  the  light  of  the  best  interests  of  the  child  (cid:214) and 
should be applied in accordance with them. Any reference to the best interests of the 

39 

40 

41 

OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1496/2002 
(OJ L 225, 22.8.2002, p. 13). 
Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on 
jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 
351, 20.12.2012, p. 1). 
Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition 
and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations (OJ L 007 
10.1.2009, p. 1). 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
child should be interpreted in light of Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights 
of the European Union and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 
of 20 November 1989.  

(14) 

, in particular on ⌦ To safeguard the best interests of the child, jurisdiction should in 
the  first  place  be  determined  according  to ⌫  the  criterion  of  proximity.  This  means 
that  ⌦ Consequently, ⌫  jurisdiction  should  lie  in  the  first  place  with  the  Member 
State of the child's habitual residence, except for certain cases of ⌦ where there is ⌫ 
a change in the child's residence or pursuant to an agreement between the holders of 
parental responsibility. 

(cid:216) new 

(15)  Where  the  child's  habitual  residence  changes  following  a  lawful  relocation, 
jurisdiction  should  follow  the  child  in  order  to  maintain  the  proximity.  This  should 
apply  where  no  proceedings  are  yet  pending,  and  also  in  pending  proceedings.  In 
pending proceedings, however, parties may agree in the interests of the efficiency of 
justice  that  the  courts  of  the  Member  State  where  proceedings  are  pending  retain 
jurisdiction  until  a  final  decision  has  been  given,  provided  that  this  is  in  the  best 
interests  of  the  child.  This  possibility  is  of  particular  importance  where  proceedings 
are nearing conclusion and one parent wishes to relocate to another Member State with 
the child. 

(16)  Under certain conditions and where it is in the best interests of the child, jurisdiction in 
matters  of  parental  responsibility  may  also  be  established  in  a  Member  State  where 
proceedings for divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment are pending between 
the  parents,  or  in  another  Member  State  with  which  the  child  has  a  substantial 
connection and upon which the parties have agreed, even if the child is not habitually 
resident in that Member State. Such jurisdiction, which is an exception to the principle 
of proximity embodied in the jurisdiction of the Member State of habitual residence of 
the child for which perpetuatio fori does not exist, should cease at the latest as soon as 
a decision in those proceedings on parental responsibility matters has become final, in 
order to respect the requirement of proximity for any new proceedings in the future. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 16 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(17)  This  Regulation  should  not  prevent  the  courts ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  a  Member  State 
⌦ not  having  jurisdiction  over  the  substance  of  the  matter ⌫  from  taking 
provisional, including protective measures, in urgent cases, with regard to ⌦ the ⌫ 
persons  or  property  (cid:214) of  a  child   situated  ⌦ present ⌫  in  that  ⌦ Member ⌫ 
State.  (cid:214) Those  measures  should  be  recognised  and  enforced  in  all  other  Member 
States  including  the  Member  States  having  jurisdiction  under  this  Regulation  until  a 
competent  authority  of  such  a  Member  State  has  taken  the  measures  it  considers 
appropriate. Measures taken by a court in one Member State should however only be 
amended  or  replaced  by  measures  also  taken by a court in the Member State having 
jurisdiction over the substance of the matter. An authority only having jurisdiction for 
provisional,  including  protective  measures  should,  if  seised  with  an  application 
concerning  the  substance  of  the  matter,  declare  of  its  own  motion  that  it  has  no 
jurisdiction. Insofar as the protection of the best interests of the child so requires, the 
authority should inform, directly or through the Central Authority, the authority of the 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
Member  State  having  jurisdiction  over  the  substance  of  the  matter  under  this 
Regulation  about  the  measures  taken.  The  failure  to  inform  the  authority  of  another 
Member State should however not as such be a ground for the non-recognition of the 
measure.  

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 13 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(18)  (cid:214) In  exceptional  cases,  the  authorities  of  the  Member  State  of  habitual  residence  of 
the child may not be the most appropriate authorities to deal with the case.  In the 
⌦ best ⌫  interests  of  the  child,  this  Regulation  allows,  by  way  of  ⌦ as  an ⌫ 
exception  and  under  certain  conditions,  that  the  court ⌦ authority ⌫  having 
jurisdiction  may  transfer  ⌦ its  jurisdiction  in ⌫  a  ⌦ specific ⌫  case  to  a  court 
⌦ an  authority ⌫  of  another  Member  State  if  this  court  ⌦ authority ⌫  is  better 
placed  to  hear  the  case.  However,  in  this  case  the  second  court  ⌦ authority ⌫  
third 
should  not  be  allowed 
⌦ authority ⌫ court. 

the  case  ⌦ jurisdiction ⌫ 

transfer 

to  a 

to 

(19)  Wherever  reference  is  made  to  'jurisdiction  under  this  Regulation'  in  parental 
responsibility  matters,  this  should  include  Articles 7  to  14,  namely  also  the  residual 
jurisdiction  under  national  law  as  permitted  by  Article 13  of  this  Regulation  and 
jurisdiction established by a transfer of jurisdiction. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 14 (adapted) 

(20)  This Regulation should have effect ⌦ be ⌫ without prejudice to the application of 
public  international  law  concerning  diplomatic  ⌦ immunity ⌫  immunities.  Where 
jurisdiction  under  this  Regulation  cannot  be  exercised  by  reason  of  the  existence  of 
⌦ due to ⌫ diplomatic immunity in accordance with international law, jurisdiction 
should be exercised in accordance with national law in a Member State in which the 
person concerned does not enjoy such immunity. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 15 (adapted) 

(21)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 of 29 May 2000 on the service in the Member 
States  of  judicial  and  extrajudicial  documents  in  civil  or  commercial  matters42 
⌦ Regulation  (EC)  No  1393/2007  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council43 ⌫  should  apply  to  the  service  of  documents  in  proceedings  instituted 
pursuant to this Regulation. 

42 
43 

OJ L 160, 30.6.2000, p. 37. 
Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 
on  the  service  in  the  Member  States  of  judicial  and  extrajudicial  documents  in  civil  or  commercial 
matters  (service  of  documents),  and  repealing  Council  Regulation (EC)  No 1348/2000  (OJ  L  324, 
10.12.2007, p. 79. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:216) new 

(22) 

If  the  outcome  of  proceedings  before  an  authority  of  a  Member  State  not  having 
jurisdiction  under  this  Regulation  depends  on  the  determination  of  an  incidental 
question  falling  within  the  scope  of  this  Regulation,  that  authority  should  not  be 
prevented by this Regulation from determining that question. Therefore, if the object 
of the proceedings is, for instance, a succession dispute in which the child is involved 
and  a  guardian  ad  litem  needs  to  be  appointed  to  represent  the  child  in  those 
proceedings,  the  authority  having  jurisdiction  for  the  succession  dispute  should  be 
allowed  to  appoint  the  guardian  for  the  proceedings  pending  before  it,  regardless  of 
whether  it  has  jurisdiction  for  parental  responsibility  matters  under  this  Regulation. 
Any  such  determination  of  an  incidental  question  should  only  produce  effects  in  the 
proceedings in question. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 18 

Where a court has decided not to return a child on the basis of Article 13 of the 1980 Hague 
Convention, it should inform the court having jurisdiction or central authority in the Member 
State  where  the  child  was  habitually  resident  prior  to  the  wrongful  removal  or  retention. 
Unless the court in the latter Member State has been seised, this court or the central authority 
should  notify  the  parties.  This  obligation  should  not  prevent  the  central  authority  from  also 
notifying the relevant public authorities in accordance with national law. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 19 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(23)  (cid:214) Proceedings  in  matters  of  parental  responsibility  under  this  Regulation  as  well  as 
return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention should respect the child’s right 
to  express  his  or  her  views  freely,  and  when  assessing  the  child’s  best  interests,  due 
weight  should  be  given  to  those  views.   The  hearing  of  the  child  (cid:214) in  accordance 
with  Article 24(1)  of  the  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  the  European  Union  and 
Article 12  of  the  United  Nations  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  the  Child   plays  an 
important  role  in  the  application  of  this  Regulation,.  although  tThis  instrument 
⌦ Regulation ⌫  is  ⌦ however ⌫  not  intended  to  modify  national  procedures 
applicable (cid:214) set out how to hear the child, for instance, whether the child is heard by 
the judge in person or by a specially trained expert reporting to the court afterwards, or 
whether the child is heard in the courtroom or in another place  . 

(24)  The  hearing  of  a  child  in  another  Member  State  may  take  place  under  ⌦ pursuant 
to ⌫  the  arrangements  laid  down  in  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1206/2001  of  28 
May  2001  on  cooperation  between  the  courts  of  the  Member  States  in  the  taking  of 
evidence in civil or commercial matters44 ⌦ , where applicable ⌫ . 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 20 (adapted) 

44 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1206/2001  of  28  May  2001  on  cooperation  between  the  courts  of  the 
Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 1). 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 17 (adapted) 

(25) 

In cases of ⌦ the ⌫ wrongful removal or retention of a child, the return of the child 
should be obtained without delay, and to this ⌦ that ⌫ end the ⌦ 1980 ⌫ Hague 
Convention  of  25 October 1980  would  ⌦ should ⌫  continue 
to  apply  as 
complemented  by  the  provisions  of  this  Regulation,  in  particular  Article  11 
Chapter III. 

(cid:216) new 

(26) 

In  order  to  conclude  the  return  proceedings  under  the  1980  Hague  Convention  as 
quickly  as  possible,  Member  States  should  concentrate  jurisdiction  for  those 
proceedings upon one or more courts, taking into account their internal structures for 
the  administration  of  justice  as  appropriate.  The  concentration  of  jurisdiction  upon  a 
limited number of courts within a Member State is an essential and effective tool for 
speeding up the handling of child abduction cases in several Member States because 
the  judges  hearing  a  larger  number  of  these  cases  develop  particular  expertise. 
Depending on the structure of the legal system, jurisdiction for child abduction cases 
could be concentrated in one single court for the whole country or in a limited number 
of courts, using, for example, the number of appellate courts as point of departure and 
concentrating  jurisdiction  for  international  child  abduction  cases  upon  one  court  of 
first instance within each district of a court of appeal. Every instance should give its 
decision no later than six weeks after the application or appeal has been lodged with it. 
Member States should limit the number of appeals possible against a decision granting 
or refusing the return of a child under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention to 
one. 

(27)  Where Central Authorities initiate or facilitate the institution of court proceedings for 
the return of children under the 1980 Hague Convention, they should ensure that the 
file  prepared  with  a  view  to  such  proceedings  is  complete  within  six  weeks,  save 
where  exceptional  circumstances  make  this  impossible.  In  order  to  enable  the 
requested  Central  Authority  to  comply  with  that  time  limit,  the  requesting  Central 
Authority  should  liaise  closely  with  the  applicant  and  respond  to  any  requests  for 
additional  information  or  missing  documents  from  the  requested  Central  Authority 
without delay. 

(28) 

In  all  cases  concerning  children,  and  in  particular  in  cases  of  international  child 
abduction,  judicial  and  administrative  authorities  should  consider  the  possibility  of 
achieving amicable solutions through mediation and other appropriate means, assisted, 
where appropriate, by existing networks and support structures for mediation in cross-
border  parental  responsibility  disputes.  Such  efforts  should  not,  however,  unduly 
prolong the return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 17 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(29)  The courts of the Member State to or in which the child has been wrongfully removed 
or  retained  should  be  able  to  oppose  his  or  her  ⌦ refuse  the ⌫  return  in  specific, 
duly justified cases., (cid:214) as permitted by the 1980 Hague Convention. Before refusing 
to return the child, the court should, however, consider whether appropriate measures 
of protection have been put in place or may be taken to eliminate any risks to the best 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
 
 
interests of the child which could prevent the return pursuant to Article 13(1)(b) of the 
1980  Hague  Convention.  To  that  end,  the  court  should  consult  with  the  competent 
judicial  and  administrative  authorities  of  the  Member  State  of  the  child's  habitual 
residence,  with  the  assistance  of  the  Central  Authorities  or  the  European  Judicial 
Network in civil and commercial matters established by Council Decision 2001/470/EC 
of 28 May 200145, and in appropriate cases, order any measures of protection necessary 
pursuant to Article 12 of this Regulation to ensure the safe return of the child. Those 
measures should be recognised and enforced in all other Member States including the 
Member  States  having  jurisdiction  under  this  Regulation  until  a  competent  court  of 
such a Member State has taken the measures it considers appropriate.  

(30)  (cid:214) Where the court of the Member State to or in which the child has been wrongfully 
removed  or  retained  decides  to  refuse  the  child's  return  under  the  1980  Hague 
Convention, in its decision it should refer explicitly to the relevant articles of the 1980 
Hague  Convention  on  which  the  refusal  was  based.   However,  sSuch  a  decision 
could ⌦ may ⌫ be replaced ⌦ , however, ⌫ by a subsequent decision (cid:214) , given 
in custody proceedings after a thorough examination of the child's best interests,  by 
the court of the Member State of habitual residence of the child prior to the wrongful 
removal  or  retention.  Should  that  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  entail  the  return  of  the 
child,  the  return  should  take  place  without  any  special  procedure  being  required  for 
⌦ the ⌫  recognition  and  enforcement  of  that  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  in  the 
Member State to or in which the child has been removed or retained. 

The recognition and enforcement of judgments given in a Member State should be based on 
the  principle  of  mutual  trust  and  the  grounds  for  non-recognition  should  be  kept  to  the 
minimum required. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 21 

Authentic  instruments  and  agreements  between  parties  that  are  enforceable  in  one  Member 
State should be treated as equivalent to ‘judgments’ for the purpose of the application of the 
rules on recognition and enforcement. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 22 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 23 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(31)  The  Tampere  European  Council  considered  in  its  conclusions  (point  34)  (cid:214) Mutual 
trust  in  the  administration  of  justice  in  the  Union  justifies  the  principle   that 
judgments  in  the  field  of  family  litigation ⌦ decisions  given in a Member State ⌫ 
should  be  ‘automatically  recognised  throughout  the  Union  ⌦ in  all  Member 
States ⌫  without  ⌦ the  need  for ⌫  any  intermediate  proceedings  ⌦ recognition 
procedure ⌫ or grounds for refusal of enforcement’. This is why judgments on rights 
of  access  and  judgments  on  return  that  have  been  certified  ⌦ In  particular,  when 
presented  with  a  decision  given  in  another  Member  State  and  pronouncing  divorce, 
legal separation or the annulment of a marriage which can no longer be challenged ⌫ 
in  the  Member  State  of  origin  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Regulation 

45 

Council Decision 2001/470/EC of 28 May 2001 establishing a European Judicial Network in civil and 
commercial matters (OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 25). 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
⌦ , the competent authorities of the requested Member State ⌫ should be recognised 
⌦ the  decision ⌫  and  enforceable  in  all  other  Member  States  ⌦ by  operation  of 
law ⌫  without  any  further  procedure  being  required⌦ and  update  their  civil-status 
records  accordingly ⌫  .  Arrangements  for  the  enforcement  of  such  judgments 
continue to be governed by national law. 

(cid:216) new 

(32)  The recognition of a decision should be refused only if one or more of the grounds for 
refusal  of  recognition  provided  for  in  Articles 37  and  38  are  present.  The  grounds 
mentioned in points (a) to (c) of Article 38(1), however, may not be invoked against  
decisions  on  rights  of  access  and  the  decisions  on  return  pursuant  to  the  second 
subparagraph of Article 26(4) which have been certified in the Member State of origin 
in accordance with this Regulation, as this was already the case under Regulation (EC) 
No 2201/2003. 

(33) 

In  addition,  the  aim  of  making  cross-border  litigation  concerning  children  less  time 
consuming and costly justifies the abolition of the declaration of enforceability prior to 
enforcement  in  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  for  all  decisions  on  parental 
responsibility  matters.  While  Regulation  (EC)  No 2201/2003  only  abolished  this 
requirement for decisions granting access and certain decisions ordering the return of a 
child,  this  Regulation  now  provides  for  a  single  procedure  for  the  cross-border 
enforcement of all decisions in matters of parental responsibility. As a result, subject 
to the provisions of this Regulation, a decision given by the authorities of a Member 
State should be treated as if it had been given in the Member State of enforcement. 

(34)  Authentic  instruments  and  agreements  between  parties  that  are  enforceable  in  one 
Member  State  should  be  treated  as  equivalent  to  'decisions'  for  the  purpose  of  the 
application of the rules on recognition and enforcement. 

(35) 

It  should  be  for  the  court  of  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  to  order  specific 
enforcement measures, to make any necessary ancillary orders which may be required 
by  national  enforcement  law  and  to  instruct  the  competent  enforcement  authority  to 
proceed  to  enforcement.  Where  a  decision  from  another  Member  State  needs  to  be 
specified by further details or adapted in order to be enforced under the national law of 
the  Member  State  of  enforcement,  the  competent  court  of  that  Member  State  should 
make  the  necessary  specifications  or  adaptations  while  respecting  the  essential 
elements of the decision. In particular, where a decision granting access rights is not 
sufficiently  specific  or  the  necessary  practical  arrangements  are  lacking,  such 
additions should be ordered by the court in the Member State of enforcement. Where a 
decision  contains  a  measure  or  order  which  is  not  known  in  the  law  of  the  Member 
State addressed, that measure or order, including any right indicated therein, should, to 
the extent possible, be adapted to one which, under the law of that Member State, has 
equivalent effects attached to it and pursues similar aims. 

(36)  The  direct  enforcement  in  a  Member  State  of  a  decision  given  in  another  Member 
State without a declaration of enforceability should not jeopardise the respect for the 
rights  of  the  defence.  Therefore,  the  person  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought 
should be able to apply for refusal of the recognition or enforcement of a decision if he 
or she considers one of the grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement of this 
Regulation to be present. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
(37)  A  party  challenging  the  enforcement  of  a  decision  given  in  another  Member  State 
should, to the extent possible and in accordance with the legal system of the Member 
State  of  enforcement,  be  able  to  invoke,  in  the  same  procedure,  in  addition  to  the 
grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement as set out in Articles 37 and 38 of 
this  Regulation,  the  grounds  for  refusal  of  enforcement  as  such  as  set  out  in 
Article 40(2) of this Regulation. The incompatibility of the enforcement of a decision 
with  the  best  interests  of  the  child  which  has  been  caused  by  the  strength  of  the 
objections  of  a  child  of  sufficient  age  and  maturity  or  by  another  change  of 
circumstances which occurred after the decision was given, should only be considered 
if  it  reaches  an  importance  comparable  to  the  public  policy  exception.  Grounds  for 
refusal  of  enforcement  available  under  national  law  may  not  be  invoked.  Where  the 
refusal  of  enforcement  is  based  on  the  objections  of  a  child  of  sufficient  age  and 
maturity,  the  competent  authorities  in  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  should 
however take all appropriate steps to prepare the child for enforcement and obtain his 
or her cooperation before refusing enforcement. 

(38) 

In order to inform the person against whom enforcement is sought of the enforcement 
of  a  decision  given  in  another  Member  State,  the  certificate  established  under  this 
Regulation  should  be  served  on  that  person  in  reasonable  time  before  the  first 
enforcement measure and if necessary, accompanied by the decision. In that context, 
the  first  enforcement  measure  should  mean  the  first  enforcement  measure  after  such 
service. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 24 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(39)  The certificate issued to facilitate enforcement of the judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ should 
not be subject to appeal. It should be rectified only where there is a material error, i.e. 
⌦ namely ⌫ where it does not correctly reflect the ⌦ decision ⌫ judgment. (cid:214) It 
should  be  withdrawn  where  it  was  clearly  wrongly  granted,  having  regard  to  the 
requirements laid down in this Regulation.  

(cid:216) new 

(40)  Where provisional, including protective, measures are ordered by an authority having 
jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter, their free circulation should be ensured 
under this Regulation. The same applies to provisional, including protective, measures 
ordered in urgent cases on the basis of Article 12 of this Regulation by an authority of 
a  Member  State  not  having  jurisdiction  as  to  the  substance  of  the  matter.  Those 
measures  should  apply  until  a  competent  authority  of  a  Member  State  having 
jurisdiction  over  the  substance  of  the  matter  under  this  Regulation  has  taken  the 
measures it considers appropriate. 

However, provisional, including protective, measures which were ordered without the 
respondent  being  summoned  to  appear  should  not  be  recognised  and  enforced  under 
this Regulation. 

(41)  ⌦ In  matters  of  parental  responsibility, ⌫  Central  aAuthorities  ⌦ should  be 
designated  in  all  Member  States.  They ⌫  should ⌦ support  parents  and  competent 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 25 (adapted) 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
 
 
authorities in cross-border proceedings and ⌫ cooperate both in general matters and 
in  specific  cases,  including  for  purposes  of  promoting  the  amicable  resolution  of 
family disputes, in matters of parental responsibility. To this ⌦ that ⌫ end cCentral 
aAuthorities shall ⌦ should ⌫ participate in the European Judicial Network in civil 
and  commercial  matters  created  by  Council  Decision  2001/470/EC  of  28 May  2001 
establishing a European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters46. 

(cid:216) new 

(42) 

In  specific  cases  in  matters  of  parental  responsibility  which  fall  within  the  scope  of 
this  Regulation,  Central  Authorities  should  cooperate  with  each  other  in  providing 
assistance to national authorities as well as to holders of parental responsibility. Such 
assistance  should  in  particular  include  locating  the  child,  either  directly  or  through 
other  competent  authorities,  where  this  is  necessary  for  carrying  out  a  request  under 
this  Regulation,  and  providing  child-related  information  required  for  the  purpose  of 
proceedings. 

(43)  Regulation  (EU)  No 2016/67947  applies  to  the  processing  of  personal  data  by  the 

Member States carried out in application of this Regulation. 

(44)  Without prejudice to any requirements under its national procedural law, a requesting 
authority  should  have  the  discretion  to  choose  freely  between  the  different  channels 
available to it for obtaining the necessary information, for example, in case of courts 
by applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001, by using the European Judicial 
Network  in  civil  and  commercial  matters,  in  particular  the  Central  Authorities 
established  under  this  Regulation,  Network  judges  and  contact  points,  or  in  case  of 
judicial and administrative authorities by requesting information through a specialised 
non-governmental organisation in this field. 

(45)  Where a request with supporting reasons for a report on the situation of the child, on 
any  ongoing  procedures  or  on  decisions  taken  concerning  the  child  is  made,  the 
competent authorities of the requested Member State should carry out such a request 
without applying any further requirements which may exist under their national law. 
The request should contain in particular a description of the proceedings for which the 
information is needed and the factual situation that gave rise to those proceedings. 

(46)  An  authority  of  a  Member  State  contemplating  a  decision  on  parental  responsibility 
should  be  entitled  to  request  the  communication  of  information  relevant  to  the 
protection  of  the  child  from  the  authorities  of  another  Member  State  if  the  best 
interests  of  the  child  so  require.  Depending  on  the  circumstances,  this  may  include 
information on proceedings and decisions concerning a parent or siblings of the child, 
or on the capacity of a parent to care for a child or to have access to the child. 

(47)  Where  a  person  having  de  facto  family  ties  as  specified  by  the  case  law  of  the 
European Court of Human Rights with the child is residing in one Member State and 
wants  to  commence  access  proceedings  in  another  Member  State  where  the  child  is 
habitually resident, that person should be permitted to directly contact the competent 

46 

47 

Council Decision 2001/470/EC of 28 May 2001 establishing a European Judicial Network in civil and 
commercial matters (OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 25). 
Regulation  (EU)  2016/679  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  27  April  2016  on  the 
protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of 
such  data,  and  repealing  Directive  95/46/EC  (General  Data  Protection  Regulation)  (O.J.  L  119, 
4.5.2016, p. 1). 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
                                                 
authorities in the Member State where he or she is residing and obtain a finding on his 
or her suitability to exercise access and on the conditions under which access should 
be  considered  so  that  those  findings  can  then  be  used  in  the  proceedings  in  the 
Member State having jurisdiction under this Regulation. That same information should 
also be provided by the competent authorities of the Member State where the person 
seeking access is residing if such a request originates from the authorities of another 
Member State having jurisdiction under this Regulation. 

(48)  As time is of the essence in parental responsibility matters, the response to any request 

made under Articles 64 and 65 should be transmitted within two months. 

(49)  Where  an  authority  of  a  Member  State  has  already  given  a  decision  in  matters  of 
parental responsibility or is contemplating such a decision and the implementation is 
to take place in another Member State, the authority may request that the authorities of 
that  other  Member  State  assist  in  the  implementation  of  the  decision.  This  should 
apply,  for  instance,  to  decisions  granting  supervised  access  to  be  exercised  in  a 
Member  State  other  than  the  Member  State  where  the  authority  ordering  access  is 
located or involving any other accompanying measures of the competent authorities in 
the Member State where the decision is to be implemented. 

(50)  Where an authority of a Member State considers the placement of a child in a foster 
family or in an institution in another Member State, a consultation procedure through 
the Central Authorities of both Member States concerned should be carried out prior to 
the placement. The authority considering the placement should obtain the consent of 
the  competent  authority  of  the  Member  State  in  which  the  child  should  be  placed 
before  ordering  the  placement.  As  the  placements  are  most  often  urgent  measures 
required to remove a child from a situation which puts his or her best interests at risk, 
time  is  of  the  essence  for  such  decisions.  In  order  to  speed  up  the  consultation 
procedure, this Regulation therefore exhaustively establishes the requirements for the 
request  and  a  time  limit  for  the  response  from  the  Member  State  where  the  child 
should be placed. The conditions for granting or refusing consent, however, continue 
to be governed by the national law of the requested Member State. 

(51)  Any long-term placement of a child abroad should be in accordance with Article 24(3) 
of  the  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  the  EU  (right  to  maintain  personal  contact 
with parents) and with the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights 
of  the  Child,  notably  Articles 8,  9  and  20.  In  particular,  when  considering  solutions, 
due regard should be paid to the desirability of continuity in a child's upbringing and 
to the child's ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 26 (adapted) 

(52)  The  Commission  should  make  publicly  available  and  update 

lists  of 
⌦ information  on ⌫  courts  and  redress  procedures  communicated  by  the  Member 
States. 

the 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
The  measures  necessary  for  the  implementation  of  this  Regulation  should  be  adopted  in 
accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures 
for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission48.  

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 27 

(cid:216) new 

(53) 

In order to ensure that the certificates to be used in connection with the recognition or 
enforcement of decisions, authentic instruments and agreements under this Regulation 
are  kept  up  to  date,  the  power  to  adopt  acts  in  accordance  with  Article  290  of  the 
Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union  should  be  delegated  to  the 
Commission in respect of amendments to Annexes I to III to this Regulation. It is of 
particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during 
its  preparatory  work,  including  at  expert  level,  and  that  those  consultations  be 
conducted  in  accordance  with  the  principles  laid  down  in  the  Interinstitutional 
Agreement  on  Better  Law-Making  of  13 April  2016.  In  particular,  to  ensure  equal 
participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the Council receives all documents at 
the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access 
to  meetings  of  Commission  expert  groups  dealing  with  the  preparation  of  delegated 
acts. 

This Regulation replaces Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 which is consequently repealed. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 28 (adapted) 

(54)  For  the  proper  functioning  of  this  Regulation,  the  Commission  should  review 

⌦ assess ⌫ its application and propose such amendments as may appear necessary. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 29 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 30 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(55)  (cid:214) [In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 and Article 4a(1) of the Protocol No 21 on the 
position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security 
and  justice,  annexed  to  the  Treaty  on  European  Union  and  to  the  Treaty  on  the 
Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of the Protocol, 
the United Kingdom and Ireland are not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation 
and  are  not  bound  by  it  or  subject  to  its  application.]   [The  United  Kingdom  and 
Ireland,  iIn  accordance  with  Article  3  ⌦ and  Article 4a(1) ⌫  of  the  Protocol 
⌦ No 21 ⌫ on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland ⌦ in respect of the 
area  of  freedom,  security  and  justice, ⌫  annexed  to  the  Treaty  on  European  Union 
and  the  Treaty  ⌦ on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union ⌫  establishing  the 
European  Community, ⌦ the  United  Kingdom  and  Ireland ⌫  have  given  notice  of 
⌦ notified ⌫  their  wish  to  take  part  in  the  adoption  and  application  of  this 
Regulation.] 

48 

OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 31 (adapted) 

(56)  Denmark,  in  accordance  with  Articles  1  and  2  of  the  Protocol  ⌦ No 22 ⌫  on  the 
position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty ⌦ on 
the Functioning of the European Union ⌫ establishing the European Community, is 
not participating ⌦ taking part ⌫ in the adoption of this Regulation and is therefore 
not bound by it nor subject to its application. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 32 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

and 

recognition 

(57)  Since the objectives of this Regulation cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member 
States (cid:214) because of the differences between national rules governing jurisdiction and 
enforcement  of  decisions  
the 
can 
therefore (cid:214) rather,  by  reason  of  the  direct  applicability  and  binding  nature  of  this 
Regulation,  be better achieved at Community ⌦ Union ⌫ level, the Community 
⌦ Union ⌫ may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as 
set out in Article 5 of the Treaty ⌦ on European Union ⌫ . In accordance with the 
principle  of  proportionality,  as  set  out  in  that  Article,  this  Regulation  does  not  go 
beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives., 

and  ⌦ but ⌫ 

This Regulation recognises the fundamental rights and observes the principles of the Charter 
of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, it seeks to ensure respect for the 
fundamental rights of the child as set out in Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights 
of the European Union, 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 recital 33 (adapted) 

HAS ADOPTED THE PRESENT REGULATION: 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

CHAPTER I 

SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS 

Article 1 

Scope 

1.  This  Regulation  shall  apply  ⌦ applies ⌫  ,  whatever  the  nature  of  the  ⌦ judicial  or 
administrative authority ⌫ court or tribunal, in civil matters relating to: 

(a)  divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment; 

(b)  the  attribution,  exercise,  delegation,  restriction  or  termination  of  parental 
responsibility. 

2. The matters referred to in paragraph 1(b) may, in particular, deal with ⌦ include ⌫ : 

(a)  rights of custody and rights of access; 

(b)  guardianship, curatorship and similar institutions; 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(c)    the designation and functions of any person or body having charge of the child's 
person or property, representing or assisting the child; 

(d)  the placement of the child in a foster family or in institutional care; 

(e)  measures  for  the  protection  of  the  child  relating  to  the  administration, 
conservation or disposal of the child's property. 

3. This Regulation shall ⌦ does ⌫ not apply to: 

(a)  the establishment or ⌦ the ⌫ contesting of a parent-child relationship; 

(b)  decisions  on  adoption,  measures  preparatory  to  adoption,  or  the  annulment  or 
revocation of adoption; 

(c)  the name and forenames of the child; 

(d)  emancipation; 

(e)  maintenance obligations; 

(f)  trusts or succession; 

(g)  measures taken as a result of criminal offences committed by children. 

For the purposes of this Regulation ⌦ the following definitions apply ⌫ : 

Article 2 

Definitions 

1.  the  term  ‘court’ ⌦ 'authority' ⌫  shall  cover  ⌦ means ⌫  all  the  authorities 
⌦ any judicial or administrative authority ⌫ in the Member States with jurisdiction 
in the matters falling within the scope of this Regulation pursuant to Article 1; 

2. the term ‘judge’ shall mean the ⌦ means a ⌫ judge or an official having powers 
equivalent  to  those  of  a  judge  in  the  matters  falling  within  the  scope  of  the 
⌦ this ⌫ Regulation; 

3.  the  term  ‘Member  State’  shall  mean  ⌦ means ⌫  all  Member  States  with  the 
exception of Denmark; 

4. the term ‘judgment’ ⌦ 'decision' ⌫ shall mean ⌦ means ⌫ a ⌦ decree, order 
or  judgment  of  an  authority  of  a  Member  State  concerning ⌫  divorce,  legal 
separation,  or  marriage  annulment,  as  well  as  a  judgment  relating  to  ⌦ or ⌫ 
parental  responsibility,  pronounced  by  a  court  of  a  Member  State,  whatever  the 
judgment may be called, including a decree, order or decision; 

5.  the  term  ‘Member  State  of  origin’  shall  mean  ⌦ means ⌫  the  Member  State 
where  ⌦ in  which ⌫ 
to  be  enforced  was 
⌦ given ⌫ issued; 

judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫ 

the 

6.  the  term  ‘Member  State  of  enforcement’  shall  mean  ⌦ means ⌫  the  Member 
State where ⌦ in which ⌫ enforcement of the judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ is sought; 

7. ‘child’ means any person below the age of 18 years; 

(cid:216) new 

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

78.  the  term  ‘parental  responsibility’  shall  mean  ⌦ means ⌫  all  rights  and  duties 
relating to the person or the property of a child which are given to a natural or legal 
person  by  ⌦ a  decision ⌫  judgment,  by  operation  of  law  or  by  an  agreement 
having  legal  effect.,  The  term  shall  include ⌦ including ⌫  rights  of  custody  and 
rights of access; 

89.  the  term  ‘holder  of  parental  responsibility’  shall  mean  ⌦ means ⌫  any 
person ⌦ , institution or other body ⌫ having parental responsibility over a child; 

910. the term ‘rights of custody’ shall include ⌦ means ⌫ rights and duties relating 
to the care of the person of a child, and in particular the right to determine the child's 
place  of  residence  ⌦ ,  including  situations  where,  pursuant  to  a  decision,  by 
operation of law ⌫ ⌦ or by an agreement having legal effect under the law of the 
Member  State  where  the  child  is  habitually  resident, ⌫ ⌦ one  holder  of  parental 
responsibility cannot decide on the child's place of residence without the consent of 
another holder of parental responsibility ⌫ ; 

1011. the term ‘rights of access’ shall include in particular ⌦ means rights of access 
to  a  child,  including ⌫  the  right  to  take  a  child  to  a  place  other  than  his  or  her 
habitual residence for a limited period of time; 

1112.  the  term  ‘wrongful  removal  or  retention’  shall  mean  ⌦ means ⌫  a  child's 
removal or retention where: 

(a)   it is in breach of rights of custody acquired by judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ 
or by operation of law or by an agreement having legal effect under the law of 
the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before 
the removal or retention; and 

(b)    provided  that,  at  the  time  of  removal  or  retention,  the  rights  of  custody 
were  actually  exercised,  either  jointly  or  alone,  or  would  have  been  so 
exercised  but  for  the  removal  or  retention.  Custody  shall  be  considered  to  be 
exercised  jointly  when,  pursuant  to  a  judgment  or  by  operation  of  law,  one 
holder of parental responsibility cannot decide on the child's place of residence 
without the consent of another holder of parental responsibility. 

CHAPTER II 

JURISDICTION 

SECTION 1 

DIVORCE, LEGAL SEPARATION AND MARRIAGE ANNULMENT 

Article 3 

General jurisdiction 

1. In matters relating to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment, jurisdiction shall lie 
with the courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ of the Member State: 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(a) in whose territory: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

the spouses are habitually resident, or 

the  spouses  were  last  habitually  resident,  insofar  as  one  of  them  still  resides 
there, or 

the respondent is habitually resident, or 

in the event of a joint application, either of the spouses is habitually resident, or 

the applicant is habitually resident if he or she resided there for at least a year 
immediately before the application was made, or 

the  applicant  is  habitually  resident  if  he  or  she  resided  there  for  at  least  six 
months immediately before the application was made and is either a national of 
the  Member  State  in  question  or,  in  the  case  of  the  United  Kingdom  and 
Ireland, has his or her ‘domicile’ there; 

(b)  of  the  nationality  of  both  spouses  or,  in  the  case  of  the  United  Kingdom  and 
Ireland, of the ‘domicile’ of both spouses. 

2. For the purposes of this Regulation, ‘domicile’ shall have the same meaning as it has under 
the legal systems of the United Kingdom and Ireland. 

Article 4 

Counterclaim 

The court in ⌦ authority before ⌫ which proceedings are pending on the basis of Article 3 
shall  also  have  jurisdiction  to  examine  a  counterclaim,  insofar  as  the  latter  ⌦ that 
counterclaim ⌫ comes within the scope of this Regulation. 

Article 5 

Conversion of legal separation into divorce 

Without prejudice to Article 3, a court ⌦ an authority ⌫ of a Member State that has given a 
judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  on  a  legal  separation  shall  also  have  jurisdiction  for  ⌦ to ⌫ 
converting that judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ into a divorce, if the law of that Member State so 
provides. 

Article 7 6 

Residual jurisdiction 

1. Where no court ⌦ authority ⌫ of a Member State has jurisdiction pursuant to Articles 3, 
4  and  5,  jurisdiction  shall  be  determined,  in  each  Member  State,  by  the  laws  of  that 
⌦ Member ⌫ State. 

Article 6 

Exclusive nature of jurisdiction under Articles 3, 4 and 5 

⌦ 2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to a respondent ⌫ A spouse who: 

(a) is habitually resident in the territory of a Member State; or 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
 
 
(b)  is  a  national  of  a  Member  State,  or,  in  the  case  of  the  United  Kingdom  and 
Ireland, has his or her ‘domicile’ in the territory of one of the latter Member States,. 

may be sued in another Member State only in accordance with Articles 3, 4 and 5. 

23. As against a respondent who is not habitually resident ⌦ in a Member State ⌫ and is 
not  either  a  national  of  a  Member  State  or, in  the  case  of  the  United  Kingdom  and  Ireland, 
does  not  have  his  ‘domicile’  within  the  territory  of  one  of  the  latter  Member  States,  any 
national of a Member State who is habitually resident within the territory of another Member 
State  may,  like  the  nationals  of  that  ⌦ Member ⌫  State,  avail  himself  of  the  rules  of 
jurisdiction applicable in that ⌦ Member ⌫ State. 

SECTION 2 

PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY 

Article 8 7 

General jurisdiction 

1.  The  courts  ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  a  Member  State  shall  have  jurisdiction  in  matters  of 
parental responsibility over a child who is habitually resident in that Member State at the time 
the court is seised. (cid:214) Where a child moves lawfully from one Member State to another and 
acquires  a  new  habitual  residence  there,  the  authorities  of  the  Member  State  of  the  new 
habitual residence shall have jurisdiction.  

2. Paragraph 1 shall be subject to the provisions of Articles 9 8, 10 9 and 12 10. 

Article 9 8 

Continuing jurisdiction of the child's former habitual residence ⌦ in relation to access 
rights ⌫ 

1.  Where  a  child  moves  lawfully  from  one  Member  State  to  another  and  acquires  a  new 
habitual  residence  there,  the  courts  ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  the  Member  State  of  the  child's 
former habitual residence shall, by way of exception to Article 8, retain jurisdiction during a 
three-month  period  ⌦ ,  for  three  months ⌫  following  the  move,  for  the  purpose  of 
modifying ⌦ to modify ⌫ a judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ on access rights issued ⌦ given ⌫ 
in  that  Member  State  before  the  child  moved,  where  ⌦ if ⌫  the  holder  of  ⌦ person 
granted ⌫ access rights pursuant to ⌦ by ⌫ the ⌦ decision ⌫ judgment on access rights 
continues  to  have  his  or  her  habitual  residence  in  the  Member  State  of  the  child's  former 
habitual residence. 

2.  Paragraph  1  shall  not  apply  if  the  holder  of  access  rights  referred  to  in  paragraph 1  has 
accepted  the  jurisdiction  of  the  courts ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  the  Member  State  of  the  child's 
new habitual residence by participating in proceedings before those courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ 
without contesting their jurisdiction. 

Article 10 9 

Jurisdiction in cases of child abduction 

In case of ⌦ the ⌫ wrongful removal or retention of the child, the courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ 
of the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
removal  or  retention  shall  retain  their  jurisdiction  until  the  child  has  acquired  a  habitual 
residence in another Member State and: 

(a) each person, institution or other body having rights of custody has acquiesced in 
the removal or retention; 

or 

(b) the child has resided in that other Member State for a period of at least one year 
after the person, institution or other body having rights of custody has had or should 
have had knowledge of the whereabouts of the child and the child is settled in his or 
her new environment and at least one of the following conditions is met: 

(i) within one year after the holder of rights of custody has had or should have 
had knowledge of the whereabouts of the child, no request for return has been 
lodged  before  the  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  State  where  the  child 
has been removed or is being retained; 

(ii)  a  request  for  return  lodged  by  the  holder  of  rights  of  custody  has  been 
withdrawn  and  no  new  request  has  been  lodged  within  the  time  limit  set  in 
paragraph point  (i); 

 (iii) a request for return lodged by the holder of rights of custody was refused 
on grounds other than Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention; 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(iii iv) a case before the court in ⌦ of ⌫ the Member State where the child 
was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention 
has been closed pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 11(7) 26(3); 

(iv v) a judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ on custody that does not entail the return of 
the child has been issued ⌦ given ⌫ by the courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ of the 
Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before the 
wrongful removal or retention. 

Article 12 10 

Prorogation of jurisdiction ⌦ Choice of court for ancillary and autonomous 
proceedings ⌫ 

1.  The  courts  of  a  Member  State  exercising  jurisdiction  by  virtue  of  ⌦ pursuant  to ⌫  
Article 3  on  an  application  for  divorce,  legal  separation  or  marriage  annulment  shall  have 
jurisdiction  in  any  matter  relating  to  parental  responsibility  connected  with  that  application 
where ⌦ the following conditions are met ⌫ : 

(a) at least one of the spouses has parental responsibility in relation to the child; and 

(b)  the  jurisdiction  of  the  courts  has  been  accepted  expressly  or  otherwise  in  an 
unequivocal  manner  by  the  spouses  and  by  the  holders  of  parental  responsibility, 
(cid:214) at the latest  at the time the court is seised, (cid:214) or, where the law of that Member 
State so provides, during those proceedings;  and 

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
⌦ (c) the jurisdiction ⌫ is in the superior ⌦ best ⌫ interests of the child. 

2. The jurisdiction conferred in paragraph 1 shall cease as soon as: 

(a) the judgment allowing or refusing ⌦ decision on ⌫ the application for divorce, 
legal separation or marriage annulment has become final; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(b)  ⌦ a  decision ⌫  in  those  cases  where  proceedings  in  relation  to  parental 
responsibility  ⌦ has  become  final,  in  cases  where  those  proceedings ⌫  are  still 
pending on the date ⌦ when the decision ⌫ referred to in point (a), a judgment in 
these proceedings has become final; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(c) the proceedings referred to in points (a) and (b) have come to an end for another 
reason. 

3.  The  courts  of  a  Member  State  shall  also  have  jurisdiction  in  relation  to  parental 
responsibility  in  proceedings  other  than  those  referred  to  in  paragraph 1  where  ⌦ the 
following conditions are met ⌫ : 

(a)  the  child  has  a  substantial  connection  with  that  Member  State,  in  particular  by 
virtue  of  the  fact  that  one  of  the  holders  of  parental  responsibility  is  habitually 
resident in that Member State or that the child is a national of that Member State; and 

(b)  the  jurisdiction  of  the  courts  has  been  accepted  expressly  or  otherwise  in  an 
unequivocal manner by all the parties to the proceedings (cid:214) at the latest  at the time 
the  court  is  seised  (cid:214) or,  where  the  law  of  that  Member  State  so  provides,  during 
those proceedings;  and  

⌦ (c) the jurisdiction ⌫ is in the best interests of the child. 

(cid:216) new 

4.  The jurisdiction conferred in paragraph 3 shall cease as soon as the proceedings have led 
to a final decision. 

5.  Where  all  the  parties  to  the  proceedings  in relation  to  parental  responsibility  accept  the 
jurisdiction  referred  to  in  paragraph 1  or  3  during  those  proceedings,  the  agreement  of  the 
parties shall be recorded in court in accordance with the law of the Member State of the court. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

46. Where the child has his or her habitual residence in the territory of a third State which is 
not  a  contracting  pParty  to  the  Hague  Convention  of  19 October 1996  on  jJurisdiction, 
aApplicable  lLaw,  rRecognition,  eEnforcement  and  cCooperation  in  rRespect  of  pParental 
rResponsibility  and  mMeasures  for  the  pProtection  of  cChildren  ⌦ ('the  1996  Hague 
Convention') ⌫ , jurisdiction under this Article shall be deemed to be in the child's interest, 
in particular if it is found impossible to hold proceedings in the third State in question. 

Article 13 11 

Jurisdiction based on the child's presence 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  Where  a  child's  habitual  residence  cannot  be  established  and  jurisdiction  cannot  be 
determined  on  the  basis  of  Article 12  10,  the  courts ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  the  Member  State 
where the child is present shall have jurisdiction. 

2.  Paragraph  1  shall  also  apply  to  refugee  children  or  children  internationally  displaced 
because of disturbances occurring in their country. 

Article 20 12 

Provisional, including protective, measures 

1.  In  urgent  cases,  the  provisions  of  this  Regulation  shall  not  prevent  the  courts 
⌦ authorities ⌫ of a Member State (cid:214) where the child or property belonging to the child is 
present  shall  have  jurisdiction  to  take   from  taking  such  provisional,  including  protective, 
measures in respect of persons (cid:214) that child  or assets (cid:214) property  in that State as may be 
available  under  the  law  of  that  Member  State,  even  if,  under  this  Regulation,  the  court  of 
another Member State has jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter. 

In so far as the protection of the best interests of the child so requires, the authority having 
taken  the  protective  measures  shall  inform  the  authority  of  the  Member  State  having 
jurisdiction under this Regulation as to the substance of the matter, either directly or through 
the Central Authority designated pursuant to Article 60. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

2. The measures referred ⌦ taken pursuant ⌫ to in paragraph 1 shall cease to apply when 
⌦ as  soon  as ⌫  the  court ⌦ authority ⌫  of  the  Member  State  having  jurisdiction  under 
this  Regulation  as  to  the  substance  of  the  matter  has  taken  the  measures  it  considers 
appropriate. 

Article 14 13 

Residual jurisdiction 

Where no court ⌦ authority ⌫ of a Member State has jurisdiction pursuant to Articles 8 7 
to  13  11,  jurisdiction  shall  be  determined,  in  each  Member  State,  by  the  laws  of  that 
⌦ Member ⌫ State. 

Article 15 14 

Transfer to a court ⌦ Member State ⌫ better placed to hear the case 

1. By way of exception, the courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ of a Member State having jurisdiction as 
to the substance of the matter may, if they consider that a court ⌦ an authority ⌫ of another 
Member  State,  with  which  the  child  has  a  particular  connection,  would  be  better  placed  to 
hear the case, or a specific part thereof, and where this is in the best interests of the child: 

(a)  stay  the  case  ⌦ proceedings ⌫  or  the  part  thereof  in  question  and  invite  the 
parties  to  introduce  a  request  before  the  court  ⌦ competent  authority ⌫  of  that 
other Member State in accordance with paragraph 4; or 

EN 

39 

   EN 

 
 
 
(b)  request  a  court ⌦ competent  authority ⌫  of  another  Member  State  to  assume 
jurisdiction in accordance with paragraph 5. 

2. Paragraph 1 shall apply: 

(a) upon application from a party; or 

(b) of the court's ⌦ authority's ⌫ own motion; or 

(c) upon application from a court ⌦ an authority ⌫ of another Member State with 
which the child has a particular connection, in accordance with paragraph 3. 

A  transfer  made  of  the  court's  ⌦ authority's ⌫  own  motion  or  by  application  of  a  court 
⌦ an authority ⌫ of another Member State must be accepted by at least one of the parties. 

3.  The  child  shall  be  considered  to  have  a  particular  connection  to  ⌦ with ⌫  a  Member 
State as mentioned ⌦ referred to ⌫ in paragraph 1, if that Member State: 

(a)  has  become  the  habitual  residence  of  the  child  after  the  court  ⌦ authority ⌫ 
referred to in paragraph 1 was seised; or 

(b) is the former habitual residence of the child; or 

(c) is the place of the child's nationality; or 

(d) is the habitual residence of a holder of parental responsibility; or 

(e) is the place where property of the child is located and the case concerns measures 
for the protection of the child relating to the administration, conservation or disposal 
of this property. 

4. The court ⌦ authority ⌫ of the Member State having jurisdiction as to the substance of 
the matter shall set a time limit by which the courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ of that other Member 
State shall be seised in accordance with paragraph 1. 

If  the  courts  ⌦ authorities ⌫  are  not  seised  by  ⌦ within ⌫  that  time  ⌦ limit ⌫  ,  the 
⌦ authority ⌫  court  which  has  been  seised  shall  continue  to  exercise  jurisdiction  in 
accordance with Articles 8 7 to 14 11 and Article 13. 

5.  The  courts ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  that  other  Member  State  may,  where  due  to  the  specific 
circumstances of the case, this is in the best interests of the child, accept jurisdiction within 
six weeks  ⌦ following  receipt ⌫  of  their  seisure  ⌦ the  request ⌫  in  accordance  with 
points (a) or (b) of paragraph 1(a) or 1(b). In this case, the court ⌦ authority ⌫ first seised 
shall decline jurisdiction. Otherwise, the court ⌦ authority ⌫ first seised shall continue to 
exercise jurisdiction in accordance with Articles 8 7 to 14 11 and Article 13. 

6.  The  courts  ⌦ authorities ⌫  shall  cooperate  for  the  purposes  of  this  Article,  either 
directly,  or  through  the  cCentral  aAuthorities  designated  pursuant  to  Article  53  60,  (cid:214) or 
through the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters  . 

SECTION 3 

COMMON PROVISIONS 

Article 16 15 

Seising of a Ccourt 

1. A court shall be deemed to be seised: 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(a)  at  the  time  when  the  document  instituting  the  proceedings  or  an  equivalent 
document is lodged with the court, provided that the applicant has not subsequently 
failed to take the steps he ⌦ or she ⌫ was required to take to have service effected 
on the respondent; or 

(b) if the document has to be served before being lodged with the court, at the time 
when  it  is  received  by  the  authority  responsible  for  service,  provided  that  the 
applicant has not subsequently failed to take the steps he ⌦ or she ⌫ was required 
to take to have the document lodged with the court. 

(cid:216) new 

Article 16 

Incidental questions 

If  the  outcome  of  proceedings  before  an  authority  of  a  Member  State  depends  on  the 
determination of an incidental question falling within the scope of this Regulation, that authority 
may determine that question. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

Article 17 

Examination as to jurisdiction 

Where a court ⌦ an authority ⌫ of a Member State is seised of a case over which it has no 
jurisdiction  under  this  Regulation  and  over  which  a  court  ⌦ an  authority ⌫  of  another 
Member State has jurisdiction by virtue of this Regulation, it shall declare of its own motion 
that it has no jurisdiction. 

Article 18 

Examination as to admissibility 

1. Where a respondent habitually resident in a State other than the Member State where the 
action was brought ⌦ proceedings were instituted ⌫ does not enter an appearance, the court 
with jurisdiction shall stay the proceedings so long as it is not shown that the respondent has 
been  able  to  receive  the  document  instituting  the  proceedings  or  an  equivalent  document  in 
sufficient time to enable him ⌦ or her ⌫ to arrange for his ⌦ or her ⌫ defence, or that all 
necessary steps have been taken to this end. 

2.  Article  19  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1348/2000  1393/2007  shall  apply  instead  of  the 
provisions  of  paragraph  1  of  this  Article  if  the  document  instituting  the  proceedings  or  an 
equivalent document had to be transmitted from one Member State to another pursuant to that 
Regulation. 

3.  Where  the  provisions  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1348/2000  1393/2007  are  ⌦ is ⌫  not 
applicable, Article 15 of the Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the service abroad 
of  judicial  and  extrajudicial  documents  in  civil  or  commercial  matters  shall  apply  if  the 
document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document had to be transmitted abroad 
pursuant to that Convention. 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Article 19 

Lis pendens and dependent actions 

1. Where proceedings relating to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment between the 
same  parties  are  brought  before  courts  ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  different  Member  States,  the 
court ⌦ authority ⌫  second  seised  shall  of  its  own  motion  stay  its  proceedings  until  such 
time as the jurisdiction of the court ⌦ authority ⌫ first seised is established. 

2.  Where  proceedings  relating  to  parental  responsibility  relating  to  the  same  child  and 
involving  the  same  cause  of  action  are  brought  before  courts ⌦ authorities ⌫  of  different 
Member  States,  the  court  ⌦ authority ⌫  second  seised  shall  of  its  own  motion  stay  its 
proceedings  until  such  time  as  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  ⌦ authority ⌫  first  seised  is 
established. 

3.  Where  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  ⌦ authority ⌫  first  seised  is  established,  the  court 
⌦ authority ⌫  second  seised  shall  decline  jurisdiction  in  favour  of  that  ⌦ authority ⌫ 
court. 

In  that  case,  the  party  who  brought  the  relevant  action ⌦ proceedings ⌫  before  the  court 
⌦ authority ⌫  second  seised  may  bring  that  action  ⌦ those  proceedings ⌫  before  the 
court ⌦ authority ⌫ first seised. 

(cid:216) new 

Article 20 

Right of the child to express his or her views 

When  exercising  their  jurisdiction  under  Section  2  of  this  Chapter,  the  authorities  of  the 
Member  States  shall  ensure  that  a  child  who  is  capable  of  forming  his  or  her  own  views  is 
given  the  genuine  and  effective  opportunity  to  express  those  views  freely  during  the 
proceedings. 

The authority shall give due weight to the child's views in accordance with his or her age and 
maturity and document its considerations in the decision. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

CHAPTER III 

⌦ CHILD ABDUCTION ⌫ 

Article 11 21 

Return of the child ⌦ under the 1980 Hague Convention ⌫ 

1.  Where  a  person,  institution  or  other  body  having  ⌦ alleging  a  breach  of ⌫  rights  of 
custody  applies  to  the  competent authorities  ⌦ court ⌫  in  a  Member  State  to  deliver  a 
judgment ⌦ for a decision ⌫ on the basis of the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on 
the  Civil  Aspects  of  International  Child  Abduction  (hereinafter  ‘the  1980  Hague 
Convention’), in order to obtain ⌦ ordering ⌫ the return of a child that has been wrongfully 
removed  or  retained  in  a  Member  State  other  than  the  Member  State  where  the  child  was 
habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention, paragraphs 2 to 8 
Articles 22 to 26 shall apply. 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:216) new 

Article 22 

Concentration of local jurisdiction 

Member States shall ensure that the jurisdiction for the applications for the return of a child 
referred to in Article 21 is concentrated on a limited number of courts. These courts shall be 
communicated by each Member State to the Commission pursuant to Article 81. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 23 

⌦ Expeditious proceedings and mediation ⌫ 

31.  A  court  to  which  an  application  for  ⌦ the ⌫  return  of  a  child  ⌦ referred  to  in 
Article 21 ⌫ is made as mentioned in paragraph 1 shall act expeditiously in proceedings on 
the application, using the most expeditious procedures available in ⌦ under ⌫ national law. 

Without prejudice to the first subparagraph, the court (cid:214) each instance  shall, except where 
exceptional  circumstances  make 
judgment 
⌦ decision ⌫ no later than six weeks after the application (cid:214) or appeal  is lodged ⌦ with 
it, ⌫ ⌦ except where exceptional circumstances make this impossible ⌫ . 

issue  ⌦ give ⌫ 

impossible, 

this 

its 

2.  As early as possible during the proceedings, the court shall examine whether the parties are 
willing to engage in mediation to find, in the best interests of the child, an agreed solution, 
provided that this does not unduly delay the proceedings. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

Article 24 

⌦ Hearing of the child in return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Convention ⌫ 

2. When applying Articles 12 and 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention, it ⌦ the court ⌫ shall 
be ensured that the child is given the opportunity to ⌦ express his or her views in accordance 
with  Article 20  of  this  Regulation ⌫  be  heard  during  the  proceedings  unless  this  appears 
inappropriate having regard to his or her age or degree of maturity. 

Article 25 

⌦ Procedure for the return of a child ⌫ 

41. A court cannot refuse to return a child on the basis of point (b) of the first paragraph of 
Article 13b of the 1980 Hague Convention if it is established that adequate arrangements have 
been made to secure the protection of the child after his or her return. 

To this end the court shall: 

(cid:216) new 

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
(a)  cooperate  with  the  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  State  where  the  child  was 
habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention, either directly, 
with  the  assistance  of  Central  Authorities  or  through  the  European  Judicial  Network  in 
civil and commercial matters, and 

(b)  take  provisional,  including  protective,  measures  in  accordance  with  Article 12  of  this 

Regulation, where appropriate. 

52. A court cannot refuse to return a child unless ⌦ only if ⌫ the person who requested the 
return of the child has been given an opportunity to be heard. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

(cid:216) new 

3.  The  court  may  declare  the  decision  ordering  the  return  of  the  child  provisionally 
enforceable  notwithstanding  any  appeal,  even  if  national  law  does  not  provide  for  such 
provisional enforceability. 

4.  Only one appeal shall be possible against the decision ordering or refusing the return of the 
child. 

5.  Article 32(4) shall apply accordingly to the enforcement of the return decision given under 
the 1980 Hague Convention. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

Article 26 

⌦ Refusal to return the child under the 1980 Hague Convention ⌫ 

1.  In a decision refusing to return the child, the court shall specify the article or articles of the 
1980 Hague Convention upon which the refusal is based. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

62. ⌦ Where a decision refusing to ⌫ If a court has issued an order  on non-return ⌦ the 
child was based on at least one of the grounds referred to in ⌫ pursuant to Article 13 of the 
1980 Hague Convention, the court must ⌦ shall ⌫ immediately either directly, or through 
its  cCentral  aAuthority  (cid:214) or  the  European  Judicial  Network  in  civil  and  commercial 
matters  , transmit a copy of the court order on non-return ⌦ that decision ⌫ and of the 
⌦ other ⌫ relevant documents, in particular a transcript of the hearings before the court, to 
the court with ⌦ having ⌫ jurisdiction or ⌦ to the ⌫ cCentral aAuthority in the Member 
State  where  the  child  was  habitually  resident  immediately  before  the  wrongful  removal  or 
retention, as determined by national law.  

(cid:214) The decision shall be accompanied by a translation in accordance with Article 69 into the 
official  language,  or  one  of  the  official  languages,  of  that  Member  State  or  into  any  other 
language  that  the  Member  State  expressly  accepts.   The  court  shall  receive  aAll  the 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
mentioned  ⌦ those ⌫  documents  ⌦ shall  be 
the  court  having 
jurisdiction ⌫  within  one  month  of  the  date  of  the  ⌦ decision  refusing  to ⌫  non-return 
⌦ the child ⌫ order. 

transmitted 

to 

73.  Unless  the  courts  in  the  Member  State  where  the  child  was  habitually  resident 
immediately before the wrongful removal or retention have already been seised by one of the 
parties, the court or central authority that receives the information mentioned ⌦ documents 
referred  to ⌫  in  paragraph  6  2  must  ⌦ shall ⌫  notify  it  ⌦ this  information ⌫  to  the 
parties  and  invite  them  ⌦ the  parties ⌫  to  make  submissions  to  the  court,  in  accordance 
with  national  law,  within  three  months  of  the  date  of  notification  so  that  the  court  can 
examine the question of custody of the child. 

Without prejudice to the ⌦ jurisdiction ⌫ rules on jurisdiction contained in ⌦ of ⌫ this 
Regulation, the court shall close the case if no submissions have been received by the court 
within the time limit. 

84. Notwithstanding a judgment of non-return (cid:214) Where the court referred to in paragraph 3 
receives  submissions  within  the  set  time  limit  or  where  custody  proceedings  are  already 
pending in that Member State, the court shall examine the question of custody of the child, 
taking into account the child's best interests as well as the reasons for and evidence underlying 
the  decision  refusing  to  return  the  child   pursuant  to  Article  13  of  the  1980 
Hague Convention,.  

aAny  subsequent  judgment  ⌦ decision  on  the  question  of  custody  which  is  given  in  the 
proceedings  referred  to  in  the  first  subparagraph ⌫  which  requires  the  return  of  the  child 
issued by a court having jurisdiction under this Regulation shall be enforceable ⌦ in all other 
Member States ⌫ in accordance with Section 4 of Chapter III below in order to secure the 
return  of  the  child  ⌦ notwithstanding  the  earlier  decision  refusing  to  return  the  child 
pursuant to Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention ⌫ . 

CHAPTER III IV 

RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT 

SECTION 1 

RECOGNITION 

Article 21 27 

Recognition of a judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ 

1.  A  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  given  in  a  Member  State  shall  be  recognised  in  the  other 
Member States without any special procedure being required. 

2. In particular, and without prejudice to paragraph 3, no special procedure shall be required 
for  updating  the  civil-status  records  of  a  Member  State  on  the  basis  of  a  judgment 
⌦ decision ⌫ relating to divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment given in another 
Member State, and against which no further appeal lies under the law of that Member State. 

3. Without prejudice to Section 4 of this Chapter, aAny interested party may, in accordance 
with  the  procedures  provided  for  in  Section  2  of  this  Chapter,  apply  for  a  decision  that 
⌦ there  are  no  grounds  for  refusal  of  recognition  referred  to  in  Articles 37  and  38 ⌫  the 

EN 

45 

   EN 

judgment  be  or  not  be  recognised.  (cid:214) Subsection 2  of  Section 3  of  this  Chapter  shall  apply 
accordingly.  

The local jurisdiction of the court appearing in the list notified by each Member State to the 
Commission  pursuant  to  Article  68  shall  be  determined  by  the  internal  law  of  the  Member 
State in which proceedings for recognition or non-recognition are brought. 

4.  Where  the  recognition  of  a  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  is  raised  as  an  incidental  question 
⌦ before  an  authority ⌫  in  a  court  of  a  Member  State,  that  court  ⌦ authority ⌫  may 
determine that issue. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

Article 37 28 

Documents ⌦ to be submitted for recognition ⌫ 

1.  A  party  seeking  or  contesting  recognition  or  applying  for  a  declaration  of  enforceability 
⌦ who  wishes  to  invoke  in  a  Member  State  a  decision  given  in  another  Member  State ⌫ 
shall produce ⌦ submit the following ⌫ : 

(a) 

(b)  

 a  copy  of  the  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  which  satisfies  the  conditions 
necessary to establish its authenticity; and 

the  ⌦ appropriate ⌫  certificate  referred  to  in  ⌦ issued  pursuant  to ⌫ 
Article 5339. 

2.  In  addition,  in  the  case  of  a  judgment  given  in  default,  the  party  seeking  recognition  or 
applying for a declaration of enforceability shall produce: 

(a)  the  original  or  certified  true  copy  of  the  document  which  establishes  that  the 
defaulting party was served with the document instituting the proceedings or with an 
equivalent document; 

or 

(b)  any  document  indicating  that  the  defendant  has  accepted  the  judgment 
unequivocally. 

(cid:216) new 

2.  The  authority  before  which  a  decision  given  in  another  Member  State  is  invoked  may, 
where  necessary,  require  the  party  invoking  it  to  provide,  in  accordance  with  Article 69,  a 
translation or a transliteration of the relevant content of the certificate referred to in point (b) 
of paragraph 1. 

The  authority  may  require  the  party  to  provide  a  translation  of  the  decision  instead  of  a 
translation of the relevant content of the certificate only if it is unable to proceed without such 
a translation. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

EN 

Article 27 29 

Stay of proceedings 

46 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1. A court of a Member State in ⌦ The authority before ⌫ which recognition is sought of a 
judgment ⌦ a  decision ⌫  given  in  another  Member  State ⌦ is  invoked ⌫  may  stay  the 
proceedings ⌦ , in whole or in part, in the following cases: ⌫  

(a)  if  an  ordinary  appeal  against  the  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  has  been  lodged.  ⌦ is 
challenged in the Member State of origin; ⌫ 

(cid:216) new 

(b)  an application has been submitted for a decision that there are no grounds for refusal of 
recognition referred to in Articles 37 and 38 or for a decision that the recognition is to be 
refused on the basis of one of those grounds; or 

(c)  in case of a decision on parental responsibility, proceedings to modify the decision or for 
a  new  decision  on  the  same  subject  matter  are  pending  in  the  Member  State  having 
jurisdiction over the substance of the matter under this Regulation. 

2. A court of a Member State in which recognition is sought of a judgment given in Ireland or 
the  United  Kingdom  may  stay  the  proceedings  if  enforcement  is  suspended  in  the  Member 
State of origin by reason of an appeal. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

SECTION 2 

APPLICATION FOR A DECLARATION OF ENFORCEABILITY (cid:214) ENFORCEMENT   

Article 28 30 

Enforceable judgments ⌦ decisions ⌫ 

1.  A  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  on  the  exercise  ⌦ matters ⌫  of  parental  responsibility  in 
respect of a child given in a Member State which is enforceable in that Member State and has 
been  served  shall  be  enforced  ⌦ enforceable ⌫  in  ⌦ the ⌫  another  Member  State 
⌦ States ⌫  when,  on  the  application  of  any  interested  party,  it  has  been  declared 
enforceable there (cid:214) without any declaration of enforceability being required  . 

2.  However,  in  the  United  Kingdom,  such  a  judgment  shall  be  enforced  in  England  and 
Wales,  in  Scotland  or  in  Northern  Ireland  only  when,  on  the  application  of  any  interested 
party, it has been registered for enforcement in that part of the United Kingdom. 

2.  Even  if  national  law  does  not  provide  for  enforceability  by  operation  of  law  ⌦ For  the 
purposes of enforcement in another Member State ⌫ of a judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ granting 
⌦ rights  of ⌫  access  rights,  the  court  of  origin  may  declare  that  the  judgment  shall  be 
⌦ decision  provisionally ⌫  enforceable,  notwithstanding  any  appeal ⌦ ,  even  if  national 
law does not provide for such provisional enforceability ⌫ . 

EN 

Article 30 31 

Procedure 

47 

   EN 

 
 
 
1.  The  procedure  for  making  the  application  ⌦ enforcement  of  decisions  given  in  another 
Member State ⌫ shall (cid:214) , in so far as it is not covered by this Regulation,  be governed by 
the  law  of  the  Member  State  of  enforcement.  (cid:214) Without  prejudice  to Article 40, a  decision 
given in a Member State which is enforceable in the Member State of enforcement shall be 
enforced  there  under  the  same  conditions  as  a  decision  given  in  the  Member  State  of 
enforcement.  

(cid:216) new 

2.  The party seeking the enforcement of a decision given in another Member State shall not 
be required to have a postal address in the Member State of enforcement.  

That  party  shall  be  required  to  have  an  authorised  representative  in  the  Member  State  of 
enforcement only if such a representative is mandatory irrespective of the nationality or the 
domicile of the parties. 

2. The applicant must give an address for service within the area of jurisdiction of the court 
applied to. However, if the law of the Member State of enforcement does not provide for the 
furnishing of such an address, the applicant shall appoint a representative ad litem. 

3. The documents referred to in Articles 37 and 39 shall be attached to the application. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 

(cid:216) new 

Article 32 

Competent courts and enforcement procedure 

1.  The application for enforcement shall be submitted to the court competent for enforcement 
under  the  national  law  of  the  Member  State  of  enforcement.  These  courts  shall  be 
communicated by each Member State to the Commission pursuant to Article 81. 

2.  The court shall take all steps necessary to ensure that the decision is enforced including the 
following: 

(a)  to order the concrete enforcement measures to be applied; 

(b)  to adapt the decision in accordance with Article 33 if necessary; 

(c)  to instruct the enforcement officer. 

3.  No grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement may be examined at this stage unless 
an application under Article 39 or Article 41 for refusal of recognition or enforcement is filed. 

4.  Where the decision was not enforced within six weeks from the moment the enforcement 
proceedings  were  initiated,  the  court  of  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  shall  inform  the 
requesting  Central  Authority  in  the  Member  State  of  origin,  or  the  applicant,  if  the 
proceedings  were  instituted  without  Central  Authority  assistance,  about  this  fact  and  the 
reasons. 

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

Article 48 33 

Practical arrangements for the exercise of rights of access ⌦ Adaptation of decision ⌫ 

1.  Where  necessary,  the  courts  of  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  may  specify  the 
necessary  details  for  enforcement  and  make  any  adaptations  required  for  enforcing  the 
decision, provided that the essential elements of this decision are respected. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

1. ⌦ In particular, ⌫ Tthe courts of the Member State of enforcement may make practical 
arrangements  for  organising  the  exercise  of  rights  of  access,  if  the  necessary  arrangements 
have not or have not sufficiently been made in the judgment delivered ⌦ decision given ⌫ 
by the courts ⌦ authorities ⌫ of the Member State having jurisdiction as to the substance of 
the matter and provided the essential elements of this judgment are respected. 

2.  The  practical  arrangements  made  pursuant  to  paragraph  1  the  second  subparagraph  shall 
cease to apply pursuant to a later judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ by the courts of the Member State 
having jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter. 

(cid:216) new 

2.  
 Where a decision contains a measure or an order which is not known in the law of the 
Member  State  of  enforcement,  the  courts  of  that  Member  State  shall  adapt  that  measure  or 
order, to the extent possible, to a measure or an order known in the law of that Member State 
which has equivalent effects attached to it and which pursues similar aims and interests. 

Such adaptation shall not result in effects going beyond those provided for in the law of the 
Member State of origin. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 45 34 

Documents ⌦ to be submitted with the application for enforcement ⌫ 

1.  A  party  seeking  ⌦ who  applies  for ⌫  enforcement  ⌦ in  a  Member  State ⌫  of  a 
judgment ⌦ decision  given  in  another  Member  State ⌫ shall ⌦ submit  the  following ⌫ 
produce: 

(a) a copy of the judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ which satisfies the conditions necessary 
to establish its authenticity; and 

(b)  the  ⌦ appropriate ⌫  certificate  referred  to  in  Article  41(1)  or  Article  42(1) 
(cid:214) issued  pursuant  to  Article 53,  certifying  that  the  decision  is  enforceable  and 

EN 

49 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
containing  the  relevant  extract  of  the  decision  which  specifies  the  obligation  to  be 
enforced  . 

2. For the purposes of this Article, 

– 

– 

the  certificate  referred  to  in  Article  41(1)  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  translation  of 
point 12 relating to the arrangements for exercising right of access, 

the certificate referred to in Article 42(1) shall be accompanied by a translation of its 
point 14 relating to the arrangements for implementing the measures taken to ensure 
the child's return. 

The  translation  shall  be  into  the  official  language  or  one  of  the  official  languages  of  the 
Member  State  of  enforcement  or  any  other  language  that  the  Member  State  of  enforcement 
expressly accepts. The translation shall be certified by a person qualified to do so in one of the 
Member States. 

(cid:216) new 

2.  The  court  may,  where  necessary,  require  the  applicant  to  provide,  in  accordance  with 
Article 69,  a  translation  or  a  transliteration  of  the  relevant  content  of  the  certificate  which 
specifies the obligation to be enforced. 

3.  The court may require the applicant to provide a translation of the decision only if it is 
unable to proceed without such a translation. 

Article 35 

Service of certificate and decision 

1.  Where enforcement of a decision given in another Member State is sought, the certificate 
issued  pursuant  to  Article 53  shall  be  served  on  the  person  against  whom  enforcement  is 
sought  prior  to  the  first  enforcement  measure.  The  certificate  shall  be  accompanied  by  the 
decision, if not already served on that person. 

2.  Where the person against whom enforcement is sought is habitually resident in a Member 
State  other  than  the  Member  State  of  origin,  he  or  she  may  request  a  translation  of  the 
decision in order to contest the enforcement if the decision is not written in or accompanied 
by a translation into either of the following languages: 

(a)  a language which he or she understands; or 

(b)  the  official  language  of  the  Member  State  in  which  he  or  she  is  habitually  resident  or, 
where there are several official languages in that Member State, the official language or 
one of the official languages of the place where he or she is habitually resident. 

Where a translation of the decision is requested under the first subparagraph, no measures of 
enforcement  may  be  taken  other  than  protective  measures  until  that  translation  has  been 
provided to the person against whom enforcement is sought. 

This paragraph shall not apply if the decision has already been served on the person against 
whom enforcement is sought in one of the languages referred to in the first subparagraph. 

3.  This  Article  shall  not  apply  to  the  enforcement  of  provisional,  including  protective 
measures. 

EN 

50 

   EN 

 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 36 

⌦ Stay of enforcement proceedings ⌫ 

⌦ 1.  Without prejudice to Article 40, the court in the Member State of enforcement shall, 
upon  application  of  the  person  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought,  stay  the  enforcement 
proceedings ⌫ (cid:214) where the enforceability of the decision is suspended in the Member State 
of origin.  

2.  Upon  application  of  the  person  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought,  the  court  in  the 
Member State of enforcement may stay the enforcement proceedings where due to temporary 
circumstances such as serious illness of the child, enforcement would put the best interests of 
the child at grave risk. Enforcement shall be resumed as soon as the obstacle ceases to exist. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

SECTION 3 

⌦ REFUSAL OF RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT ⌫ 

S U B S E C T I O N  1 

⌦ R E F U S A L  O F  R E C O G N I T I O N ⌫ 

Article 22 37 

Grounds of non-recognition for judgments relating to divorce, legal separation or 
marriage annulment ⌦ decisions in matrimonial matters ⌫ 

A judgment ⌦ On the application of any interested party, the recognition of a decision ⌫ 
relating  to  a  divorce,  legal  separation  or  marriage  annulment  shall  not  be  ⌦ refused ⌫ 
recognised: 

(a)  if  such  recognition  is  manifestly  contrary  to  the  public  policy  of  the  Member 
State in which recognition is sought; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(b)  where  it  was  given  in  default  of  appearance,  if  the  respondent  was  not  served 
with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document 
in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable the respondent to arrange for his or 
her  defence  unless  it  is  determined  that  the  respondent  has  accepted  the  judgment 
⌦ decision ⌫ unequivocally; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(c)  if  it  is  irreconcilable  with  a  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  given  in  proceedings 
between the same parties in the Member State in which recognition is sought; or 

(d)  if  it  is  irreconcilable  with  an  earlier  judgment ⌦ decision ⌫  given  in  another 
Member State or in a non-Member State between the same parties, provided that the 

EN 

51 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
earlier  judgment ⌦ decision ⌫  fulfils  the  conditions  necessary  for  its  recognition 
in the Member State in which recognition is sought. 

Article 23 38 

Grounds of non-recognition for judgments relating to ⌦ decisions in matters of ⌫ 
parental responsibility 

⌦ 1.  On  the  application  of  any  interested  party,  the  recognition  of  a  decision ⌫  A 
judgment relating to parental responsibility shall not be ⌦ refused ⌫ recognised: 

(a)  if  such  recognition  is  manifestly  contrary  to  the  public  policy  of  the  Member 
State  in  which  recognition  is  sought  taking  into  account  the  best  interests  of  the 
child; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(b) if it was given, except in case of urgency, without the child having been given an 
opportunity  to  be  heard,  in  violation  of  fundamental  principles  of  procedure  of  the 
Member State in which recognition is sought; 

(cb)  where  it  was  given  in  default  of  appearance  if  the  person  in  default  was  not 
served  with  the  document  which  instituted  the  proceedings  or  with  an  equivalent 
document in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable that person to arrange for 
his or her defence unless it is determined that such person has accepted the judgment 
⌦ decision ⌫ unequivocally; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(dc)  on  the  request  of  any  person  claiming  that  the  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫ 
infringes his or her parental responsibility, if it was given without such person having 
been given an opportunity to be heard; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(ed) if it is irreconcilable with a later judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ relating to parental 
responsibility given in the Member State in which recognition is sought; ⌦ or ⌫ 

(fe)  if  it  is  irreconcilable  with  a  later  judgment ⌦ decision ⌫  relating  to  parental 
responsibility  given  in  another  Member  State  or  in  the  non-Member  State  of  the 
habitual  residence  of  the  child  provided  that  the  later  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫ 
fulfils  the  conditions  necessary  for  its  recognition  in  the  Member  State  in  which 
recognition is sought. 

or 

(g) if the procedure laid down in Article 56 has not been complied with. 

⌦ 2.  The  grounds  for  refusal  referred  to  in  points  (a)  to  (c)  of  paragraph 1  may  not  be 
invoked  against  a  decision  granting  rights  of  access  or  entailing  the  return  of  the  child 
pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 26(4). ⌫ 

(cid:216) new 

Article 39 

Procedure for refusal of recognition 

The procedures provided for in Articles 41 to 47 and, where appropriate, Sections 4 and 6 and 
Chapter VI shall apply accordingly to an application for refusal of recognition. 

EN 

52 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
S u b s e c t i o n  2 

R e f u s a l  o f  e n f o r c e m e n t 

Article 40 

Grounds for refusal of enforcement of decisions in matters of parental responsibility 

1.  The enforcement of a decision shall be refused upon the application of the person against 
whom  enforcement  is  sought  where  one  of  the  grounds  of  non-recognition  referred  to  in 
Article 38(1) is found to exist. 

However, the grounds of non-recognition referred to in points (a) to (c) of Article 38(1) may 
not be invoked against a decision granting rights of access or entailing the return of the child 
pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 26(4). 

2.  The enforcement of a decision may be refused upon the application of the person against 
whom enforcement is sought where, by virtue of a change of circumstances since the decision 
was given, the enforcement would be manifestly contrary to the public policy of the Member 
State of enforcement because one of the following grounds exists: 

(a)  the  child  being  of  sufficient  age  and  maturity  now  objects  to  such  an  extent  that  the 

enforcement would be manifestly incompatible with the best interests of the child; 

(b)  other circumstances have changed to such an extent since the decision was given that its 
enforcement would now be manifestly incompatible with the best interests of the child. 

3. 
In  the  cases  referred  to  in  point (a)  of  paragraph 2,  before  refusing  enforcement  the 
competent  authorities  in  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  shall  take  the  necessary  steps  to 
obtain the child's cooperation and ensure enforcement in accordance with the best interests of 
the child. 

4.  Grounds for refusal of enforcement beyond those laid down in this Regulation may not be 
invoked. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 29 41 

Jurisdiction of local courts 

1. An ⌦ The ⌫ application for a declaration of enforceability (cid:214) refusal of enforcement  
shall  be  submitted  to  the  court  appearing  in  the  list  notified ⌦ competent  for  enforcement 
under  the  national  law  of  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  as  communicated ⌫  by  each 
Member State to the Commission pursuant to Article 68 81. 

2. The local jurisdiction shall be determined by reference to the place of habitual residence of 
the person against whom enforcement is sought or by reference to the habitual residence of 
any child to whom the application relates. 

EN 

53 

   EN 

 
Where neither of the places referred to in the first subparagraph can be found in the Member 
State  of  enforcement,  the  local  jurisdiction  shall  be  determined  by  reference  to  the  place  of 
enforcement. 

(cid:216) new 

Article 42 

Procedure for refusal of enforcement 

1.  The  procedure  for  refusal  of  enforcement  shall,  in  so  far  as  it  is  not  covered  by  this 
Regulation, be governed by the law of the Member State of enforcement. 

2.  The applicant shall provide the court with a copy of the decision and, where necessary, a 
translation of the decision in accordance with Article 69 or a transliteration of it. 

The  court  may  dispense  with  the  production  of  the  documents  referred  to  in  the  first 
subparagraph  if  it  already  possesses  them  or  if  it  considers  it  unreasonable  to  require  the 
applicant to provide them. 

Where  the  court  considers  it  unreasonable  to  require  the  applicant  to  provide  them,  it  may 
require the other party to provide those documents. 

3.  The party seeking the refusal of enforcement of a decision given in another Member State 
shall not be required to have a postal address in the Member State of enforcement. 

That  party  shall  be  required  to  have  an  authorised  representative  in  the  Member  State  of 
enforcement only if such a representative is mandatory irrespective of the nationality or the 
domicile of the parties. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 31 43 

Decision of the court 

1.  The  court  applied  to  shall  give  its  decision (cid:214) on  the  refusal  of  enforcement   without 
delay.  Neither  the  person  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought,  nor  the  child  shall,  at  this 
stage of the proceedings, be entitled to make any submissions on the application. 

2. The application may be refused only for one of the reasons specified in Articles 22, 23 and 
24. 

3. Under no circumstances may a judgment be reviewed as to its substance. 

Article 32  

Notice of the decision 

The appropriate officer of the court shall without delay bring to the notice of the applicant the 
decision given on the application in accordance with the procedure laid down by the law of 
the Member State of enforcement. 

Article 33 44 

Appeal against the decision 

EN 

54 

   EN 

 
 
1.  The  decision  on  the  application  for  a  declaration  of  enforceability  (cid:214) refusal  of 
enforcement  may be appealed against by either party. 

2. The appeal shall be lodged with the court appearing in the list notified ⌦ competent under 
the  national  law  to  hear  the  appeals  against  decisions  referred  to  in  Article 40  as 
communicated ⌫ by each Member State to the Commission pursuant to Article 68 81. 

3.  The  appeal  shall  be  dealt  with  in  accordance  with  the  rules  governing  procedure  in 
contradictory matters. 

4. If the appeal is brought by the applicant for a declaration of enforceability, the party against 
whom enforcement is sought shall be summoned to appear before the appellate court. If such 
person fails to appear, the provisions of Article 18 shall apply. 

5.  An  appeal  against  a  declaration  of  enforceability  must  be  lodged  within  one  month  of 
service  thereof.  If  the  party  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought  is  habitually  resident  in  a 
Member State other than that in which the declaration of enforceability was given, the time 
for appealing shall be two months and shall run from the date of service, either on him or at 
his residence. No extension of time may be granted on account of distance. 

Article 34 45 

Courts of ⌦ Further ⌫ appeal and means of contest ⌦ competent courts ⌫ 

The judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ given on appeal may be contested only (cid:214) before the courts and 
in  by the proceedings referred to in the list notified ⌦ communicated ⌫ by each Member 
State to the Commission pursuant to Article 68 81. 

Article 35 46 

Stay of proceedings 

1. The court ⌦ to which an application for refusal of enforcement is submitted or ⌫ with 
which the ⌦ an ⌫ appeal is lodged under Articles 33 44 or 34 45 may, on the application of 
the  party  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought,  stay  the  proceedings  ⌦ for  one  of  the 
following reasons: ⌫ 

if (a) an ordinary appeal has been lodged in the Member State of origin,;  

or if (b) the time ⌦ limit ⌫ for such appeal has not yet expired.; 

 (c) in case of a decision on parental responsibility, proceedings to modify the decision or for 
a  new  decision  on  the  same  subject  matter  are  pending  in  the  Member  State  having 
jurisdiction over the substance of the matter under this Regulation. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

In the latter case, ⌦ Where ⌫ the court ⌦ stays the proceedings for the reason referred to 
in point (b), it ⌫ may specify the time ⌦ limit ⌫ within which an appeal is to be lodged. 

2.  Where  the  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  was  given  in  Ireland  (cid:214) ,  Cyprus   or  the  United 
Kingdom, any form of appeal available in the Member State of origin shall be treated as an 
ordinary appeal for the purposes of point (a) of paragraph 1. 

EN 

55 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

Article 36 47 

Partial enforcement 

1.  Where  a  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  has  been  given  in  respect  of  several  matters  and 
enforcement  cannot  be  authorised ⌦ is  refused ⌫  for  all  ⌦ some ⌫  of  them,  the  court 
shall  authorise  enforcement  ⌦ shall  nonetheless  be  possible ⌫  for  one  or  more  of  them 
⌦ the parts of the decision not affected by the refusal ⌫ . 

2. An applicant may request partial enforcement of a judgment. 

SECTION 3 4 

⌦ COMMON ⌫ PPROVISIONS COMMON TO SECTIONS 1 AND 2 

(cid:216) new 

Article 48 

Provisional, including protective, measures 

The  provisions  of  this  Chapter  applicable  to  decisions  shall  apply  to  provisional,  including 
protective, measures ordered by an authority having jurisdiction under Chapter II. 

They  shall  not  apply  to  provisional,  including  protective,  measures  ordered  by  an  authority 
without the respondent being summoned to appear. 

Return decisions given under the 1980 Hague Convention 

Article 49 

The provisions of this Chapter relating to decisions on matters of parental responsibility, with 
the exception of Article 35 and Article 38(2), shall apply accordingly to decisions given in a 
Member State and ordering the return of a child to another Member State pursuant to the 1980 
Hague Convention which have to be enforced in a Member State other than the Member State 
where they were given. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 24 50 

Prohibition of review of jurisdiction of the court ⌦ authority ⌫ of origin 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  court  ⌦ authority ⌫  of  the  Member  State  of  origin  may  not  be 
reviewed.  The  test  of  public  policy  referred  to  in  point (a)  of  Articles  22(a)  37  and  23(a) 
point (a)  of  Article 38  may  not  be  applied  to  the  rules  relating  to  jurisdiction  set  out  in 
Articles 3 to 14. 

EN 

56 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Article 25 51 

Differences in applicable law 

The  recognition  of  a  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  ⌦ in  matrimonial  matters ⌫  may  not  be 
refused because the law of the Member State in which such recognition is sought would not 
allow divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment on the same facts. 

Article 26 52 

Non-review as to substance 

Under no circumstances may a judgment ⌦ decision given in another Member State ⌫ be 
reviewed as to its substance. 

Article 38 

Absence of documents 

1.  If  the  documents  specified  in  Article  37(1)(b)  or  (2)  are  not  produced,  the  court  may 
specify a time for their production, accept equivalent documents or, if it considers that it has 
sufficient information before it, dispense with their production. 

2. If the court so requires, a translation of such documents shall be furnished. The translation 
shall be certified by a person qualified to do so in one of the Member States. 

Article 39 53 

Certificate concerning judgments ⌦ decisions ⌫ in matrimonial matters and 
certificate concerning judgments on ⌦ decisions in matters of ⌫ parental 
responsibility 

1. The competent court or authority of a Member State of origin ⌦ that has given a decision 
in matrimonial matters ⌫ shall, at the request of any interested party, issue a certificate using 
the  standard  form  set  out  in  Annex  I  (judgments  in  matrimonial  matters)  or  in  Annex  II 
(judgments on parental responsibility). 

⌦ 2.  The judge who has given a decision in matters of parental responsibility shall issue a 
certificate  using  the  form  set  out  in  Annex II.  Where  such  decision  involves  a  cross-border 
situation  at  the  time  of  the  delivery  of  the  decision,  the  judge  shall  issue  the  certificate  ex 
officio  when  the  decision  becomes  enforceable,  even  if  only  provisionally.  If  the  situation 
acquires  a  cross-border  character  only  subsequently,  the  certificate  shall  be  issued  at  the 
request of one of the parties. ⌫ 

SECTION 4 

ENFORCEABILITY OF CERTAIN JUDGMENTS CONCERNING RIGHTS OF ACCESS 
AND OF CERTAIN JUDGMENTS WHICH REQUIRE THE RETURN OF THE CHILD 

1. This Section shall apply to: 

(a) rights of access; 

EN 

Article 40 

Scope 

57 

   EN 

 
and 

(b) the return of a child entailed by a judgment given pursuant to Article 11(8). 

2.  The  provisions  of  this  Section  shall  not  prevent  a  holder  of  parental  responsibility  from 
seeking  recognition  and  enforcement  of  a  judgment  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  in 
Sections 1 and 2 of this Chapter. 

Article 41 

Rights of access 

1.  The  rights  of  access  referred  to  in  Article  40(1)(a)  granted  in  an  enforceable  judgment 
given  in  a  Member  State  shall  be  recognised  and  enforceable  in  another  Member  State 
without the need for a declaration of enforceability and without any possibility of opposing its 
recognition  if  the  judgment  has  been  certified  in  the  Member  State  of  origin  in  accordance 
with paragraph 2. 

Even  if  national  law  does  not  provide  for  enforceability  by  operation  of  law  of  a  judgment 
granting access rights, the court of origin may declare that the judgment shall be enforceable, 
notwithstanding any appeal. 

⌦ 3.  The  certificate  shall  be  completed  in  the  language  of  the decision. ⌫(cid:214) Where 
appropriate,  it  shall  also  contain  relevant  information  on  the  recoverable  costs  of  the 
proceedings and the calculation of interest.  

24.  The  judge  ⌦ or  authority  of  the  Member  State ⌫  of  origin  shall  issue  the  certificate 
⌦ certificates ⌫  referred  to  in  paragraphs  1  and  2  using  the  standard  form  in  Annex  III 
(certificate concerning rights of access) only if: 

⌦ (a) 

all parties concerned were given an opportunity to be heard; and ⌫ 

(ab) where the judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ was given in default,: 

(i)  the  person  defaulting  was  served  with  the  document  which  instituted  the 
proceedings  or  with  an  equivalent  document  in  sufficient  time  and  in  such  a 
way as to enable that person to arrange for his or her defense,; or, 

(ii) ⌦ it is established that ⌫ the person ⌦ defaulting accepted the decision 
unequivocally, even if that person was ⌫ has been served with the document 
but not in compliance with these conditions, it is nevertheless established that 
he or she accepted the decision unequivocally; ⌦ referred to in point (i). ⌫ 

(b) all parties concerned were given an opportunity to be heard; 

and 

(c) ⌦ 5. 
Without  prejudice  to  paragraph 4,  the  judge  who  has  given  a  decision  in 
matters of parental responsibility shall issue the certificate referred to in paragraph 2 only if 
also ⌫ the child was given an (cid:214) genuine and effective  opportunity to ⌦ express his or 
her  views  in  accordance  with  Article 20 ⌫  be  heard,  unless  a  hearing  was  considered 
inappropriate having regard to his or her age or degree of maturity. 

The certificate shall be completed in the language of the judgment.  

3. Where the rights of access involve a cross-border situation at the time of the delivery of the 
judgment, the certificate shall be issued ex officio when the judgment becomes enforceable, 
even if only provisionally. If the situation subsequently acquires a cross-border character, the 
certificate shall be issued at the request of one of the parties. 

EN 

58 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
Article 42 

Return of the child 

1.  The  return  of  a  child  referred  to  in  Article  40(1)(b)  entailed  by  an  enforceable  judgment 
given  in  a  Member  State  shall  be  recognised  and  enforceable  in  another  Member  State 
without the need for a declaration of enforceability and without any possibility of opposing its 
recognition  if  the  judgment  has  been  certified  in  the  Member  State  of  origin  in  accordance 
with paragraph 2. 

Even if national law does not provide for enforceability by operation of law, notwithstanding 
any appeal, of a judgment requiring the return of the child mentioned in Article 11(b)(8), the 
court of origin may declare the judgment enforceable. 

26. ⌦ Without prejudice to paragraphs 4 and 5, ⌫ Tthe judge of origin who delivered the 
judgment  ⌦ has  given  a  decision  on  the  question  of  custody ⌫  referred  to  in  the  second 
subparagraph of Article 40(1)(b) 26(4) shall issue the certificate referred to in paragraph 1 2 
only if: 

(a) the child was given an opportunity to be heard, unless a hearing was considered 
inappropriate having regard to his or her age or degree of maturity; 

(b) the parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and 

(c)  the  court  ⌦ that  judge ⌫  has  taken  into  account  in  issuing  its  judgment 
⌦ giving  the decision ⌫ the reasons for and evidence underlying the order issued 
⌦ prior  decision  given  in  another  Member  State ⌫  pursuant  to  Article  13  of  the 
1980 Hague Convention. 

In the event that ⌦ Where ⌫ the court or any other authority takes measures to ensure the 
protection of the child after its ⌦ his or her ⌫ return to the ⌦ Member ⌫ State of habitual 
residence, the certificate shall contain details of such measures. 

The  judge  of  origin  shall  of  his  or  her  own  motion  issue  that  certificate  using  the  standard 
form in Annex IV (certificate concerning return of the child(ren)). 

The certificate shall be completed in the language of the judgment. 

Article 44 

Effects of the certificate 

7.  The  certificate  shall  take  effect  only  within  the  limits  of  the  enforceability  of  the 
⌦ decision ⌫ judgment. 

Article 43 54 

Rectification ⌦ and withdrawal ⌫ of the certificate 

1.   The  authority  of  origin  shall,  upon  application,  rectify  the  certificate  where,  due  to  a 
material error, there is a discrepancy between the decision and the certificate. 

2.  The  authority  of  origin  shall,  upon  application,  withdraw  the  certificate  where  it  was 
clearly wrongly granted, having regard to the requirements laid down in this Regulation. 

(cid:216) new 

EN 

59 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
13.  The  law  of  the  Member  State  of  origin  shall  be  applicable  ⌦ apply ⌫  to  any  ⌦ the 
procedure for ⌫ rectification (cid:214) and withdrawal  of the certificate. 

24. No appeal shall lie against the issuing of a certificate pursuant to Articles 41(1) or 42(1). 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

SECTION 5 

AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENTS AND AGREEMENTS 

Article 46 55 

⌦ Authentic instruments and agreements ⌫ 

Documents which have been formally drawn up or registered as authentic instruments and are 
enforceable in one Member State and also agreements between the parties that are enforceable 
in  the  Member  State  in  which  they  were  concluded  shall  be  recognised  and  declared 
enforceable (cid:214) enforced  under the same conditions as judgments ⌦ decisions ⌫ . 

(cid:216) new 

Article 56 

Certificate 

1.  The  competent  authority  of  the  Member  State  of  origin  shall,  at  the  request  of  any 
interested party, issue the certificate using the form set out in Annex III. 

The certificate shall contain a summary of the enforceable obligation recorded in the authentic 
instrument or contained in the agreement between the parties. 

2.  The  certificate  shall  be  completed  in  the  language  of  the  authentic  instrument  or 
agreement. 

3.  Article 54 shall apply accordingly to the rectification and withdrawal of the certificate. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

SECTION 6 

OTHER PROVISIONS 

Article 47 

Enforcement procedure 

1. The enforcement procedure is governed by the law of the Member State of enforcement. 

2. Any judgment delivered by a court of another Member State and declared to be enforceable 
in  accordance  with  Section  2  or  certified  in  accordance  with  Article 41(1)  or  Article  42(1) 

EN 

60 

   EN 

 
 
 
shall be enforced in the Member State of enforcement in the same conditions as if it had been 
delivered in that Member State. 

In particular, a judgment which has been certified according to Article 41(1) or Article 42(1) 
cannot be enforced if it is irreconcilable with a subsequent enforceable judgment. 

Article 49 57 

Costs 

The  provisions  of  tThis  Chapter,  with  the  exception  of  Section  4,  shall  also  apply  to  the 
determination of the amount of costs and expenses of proceedings under this Regulation and 
to the enforcement of any order concerning such costs and expenses. 

Article 50 58 

Legal aid 

An applicant who, in the Member State of origin, has benefited from complete or partial legal 
aid or exemption from costs or expenses shall be entitled, in the procedures provided for in 
Articles  21  27(3),  28,  41,  42  and  48  (cid:214) Articles 32,  39  and  42   to  benefit  from  the  most 
favourable legal aid or the most extensive exemption from costs and expenses provided for by 
the law of the Member State of enforcement. 

Article 51 59 

Security, bond or deposit 

No  security,  bond  or  deposit,  however  described,  shall  be  required  of  a  party  who  in  one 
Member  State  applies  for  ⌦ the ⌫  enforcement  of  a  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  given  in 
another Member State on the following grounds: 

(a) ⌦ that he or she is a foreign national or ⌫ that he or she is not ⌦ domiciled 
or ⌫ habitually resident in the Member State in which enforcement. is sought; or 

(b) that he or she is either a foreign national or, where enforcement is sought in either 
the United Kingdom or Ireland, does not have his or her ‘domicile’ in either of those 
Member States. 

CHAPTER IV V 

COOPERATION BETWEEN CENTRAL AUTHORITIES IN MATTERS 
OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY 

Article 53 60 

Designation 

Each  Member  State  shall  designate  one  or  more  cCentral  aAuthorities  to  assist  with  the 
application of this Regulation ⌦ in matters of parental responsibility ⌫ and shall specify the 
geographical or functional jurisdiction of each. Where a Member State has designated more 
than  one  cCentral  aAuthority,  communications  shall  normally  be  sent  direct  to  the  relevant 
cCentral  aAuthority  with  jurisdiction.  Where  a  communication  is  sent  to  a  cCentral 
aAuthority without jurisdiction, the latter shall be responsible for forwarding it to the cCentral 
aAuthority with jurisdiction and informing the sender accordingly. 

EN 

61 

   EN 

 
 
(cid:216) new 

Article 61 

Resources 

Member  States  shall  ensure  that  Central  Authorities  have  adequate  financial  and  human 
resources to enable them to carry out the obligations assigned to them under this Regulation. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

Article 54 62 

General functions ⌦ tasks of the Central Authorities ⌫ 

The  cCentral  aAuthorities  shall  communicate  information  on  national  laws  and  procedures 
and take ⌦ the appropriate ⌫ measures to improve ⌦ for improving ⌫ the application of 
this  Regulation  and  strengthening  their  cooperation.  For  this  purpose  the  European  Judicial 
Network in civil and commercial matters created by Decision No 2001/470/EC shall be used. 

Article 55 63 

Cooperation on ⌦ in specific ⌫ cases specific ⌦ relating ⌫ to parental responsibility 

1.  The  cCentral  aAuthorities  shall,  upon  request  from  a  cCentral  aAuthority  of  another 
Member State or from a holder of parental responsibility an authority, cooperate on ⌦ in ⌫ 
specific  cases  to  achieve  the  purposes  of  this  Regulation.  To  this  end,  they  shall,  acting 
directly or through public authorities or other bodies, take all appropriate steps in accordance 
with the law of that Member State in matters of personal data protection to: 

(cid:216) new 

(a) 
provide,  on  the  request  of  the  Central  Authority  of  another  Member  State, 
assistance in discovering the whereabouts of a child where it appears that the child 
may  be  present  within  the  territory  of  the  requested  Member  State  and  the 
determination of the whereabouts of the child is necessary for carrying out a request 
under this Regulation; 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

(ab) collect and exchange information (cid:214) under Article 64;  : 

(i) on the situation of the child; 

(ii) on any procedures under way; or 

(iii) on decisions taken concerning the child; 

(bc) provide information and assistance to holders of parental responsibility seeking 
the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  on  ⌦ in ⌫  their  territory,  in 
particular concerning rights of access and the return of the child; 

EN 

62 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cd)  facilitate  communications  between  courts  ⌦ authorities ⌫  ,  in  particular  for 
the  application  of  Article 11(6)  and  (7)  and  Article  15  14,  (cid:214) Article 25(1)(a),  
Article 26(2) and the second subparagraph of Article 26(4); 

(de)  provide  such 
⌦ authorities ⌫ to apply Article 56 65; and 

information  and  assistance  as 

is  needed  by  courts 

(ef) facilitate agreement between holders of parental responsibility through mediation 
or other means, and facilitate cross-border cooperation to this end.; ⌦ and ⌫ 

(cid:216) new 

 (g)  ensure  that  where  they  initiate  or  facilitate  the  institution  of  court  proceedings  for  the 
return  of  children  under  the  1980  Hague  Convention,  the  file  prepared  in  view  of  such 
proceedings,  save  where  exceptional  circumstances  make  this  impossible,  is  complete 
within six weeks. 

2.  Requests  pursuant  to  points (c)  and  (f)  of  paragraph 1  may  also  be  made  by  holders  of 
parental responsibility. 

3.  The  Central  Authorities  shall,  within  their  Member  State,  transmit  the  information 
referred  to  in  Articles 63  and  64  to  the  competent  authorities,  including  the  authorities 
competent for service of documents and for enforcement of a decision, as the case may be. 

Any authority to which information has been transmitted pursuant to Articles 63 and 64 may 
use it for the purposes of this Regulation. 

4.  Notification  of  the  data  subject  of  the  transmission  of  all  or  part  of  the  information 
collected shall take place in accordance with the national law of the requested Member State. 

Where there is a risk that it may prejudice the effective carrying out of the request under this 
Regulation for which the information was transmitted, such notification may be deferred until 
the request has been carried out. 

Article 64 

Cooperation on collecting and exchanging information 

1.  Upon a request made with supporting reasons by the Central Authority or an authority of a 
Member State with which the child has a substantial connection, the Central Authority of the 
Member  State  where  the  child  is  habitually  resident  and  present  may,  directly  or  through 
authorities or other bodies: 

(a)  provide a report: 

(i) 

on the situation of the child; 

(ii)  on any procedures under way concerning the child; or 

(iii)  on decisions taken concerning the child; 

(b)  request the competent authority of its Member State to consider the need to take measures 

for the protection of the person or property of the child. 

EN 

63 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.  Where  a  decision  in  matters  of  parental  responsibility  is  contemplated,  an  authority  of  a 
Member State, if the situation of the child so requires, may request any authority of another 
Member State which has information relevant to the protection of the child to communicate 
such information. 

3.  An  authority  of  a  Member  State  may  request  the  authorities  of  another  Member  State  to 
assist in the implementation of decisions in matters of parental responsibility given under this 
Regulation, especially in securing the effective exercise of rights of access as well as of the 
right to maintain direct contact on a regular basis. 

4.  The  requests  referred  to  in  paragraphs 1  to  3  and  the  accompanying  documents  shall  be 
accompanied by a translation into the official language or one of the official languages of the 
requested  Member  State  or  any  other  language  that  the  requested  Member  State  expressly 
accepts. Member States shall communicate such acceptance to the Commission in accordance 
with Article 81. 

5.  The  authorities  of  a  Member  State  where  the  child  is  not  habitually  resident  shall,  upon 
request  of  a  person  residing  in  that  Member  State  who  is  seeking  to  obtain  or  to  maintain 
access to the child, or upon request of a Central Authority of another Member State, gather 
information or evidence, and may make a finding, on the suitability of that person to exercise 
access and on the conditions under which access should be exercised. 

6.  Except where  exceptional circumstances make this impossible, the requested information 
shall be transmitted to the Central Authority or competent authority of the requesting Member 
State no later than two months following the receipt of the request. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 56 65 

Placement of a child in another Member State 

1.  Where  a  court  ⌦ an  authority ⌫  having  jurisdiction  under  Articles  8  to  15  ⌦ this 
Regulation ⌫  contemplates  the  placement  of  a  child  in  institutional  care  or  with  a  foster 
family  and  where  such  placement  is  to  take  place  in  another  Member  State,  it  shall  first 
consult  the  central  authority  or  other  (cid:214) obtain  the  consent  of  the  competent   authority 
having  jurisdiction  in  the  latter  ⌦ that  other  Member ⌫  State  where  public  authority 
intervention  in  that  Member  State  is  required  for  domestic  cases  of  child  placement.  (cid:214) To 
that  effect  it  shall,  through  the  Central  Authority  of  its  own  Member  State,  transmit  to  the 
Central Authority of the Member State where the child is to be placed a request for consent 
which includes a report on the child together with the reasons for the proposed placement or 
provision of care.  

2.  The  request  and  the  accompanying  documents  referred  to  in  paragraph 1  shall  be 
accompanied by a translation into the official language or one of the official languages of the 

(cid:216) new 

EN 

64 

   EN 

 
 
requested  Member  State  or  any  other  language  that  the  requested  Member  State  expressly 
accepts. Member States shall communicate such acceptance to the Commission in accordance 
with Article 81. 

23.  The  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  on  placement  referred  to  in  paragraph  1  may  be  made 
⌦ given ⌫  in  the  requesting  ⌦ Member ⌫  State  only  if  the  competent  authority  of  the 
requested ⌦ Member ⌫ State has consented to the placement. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

4.  Except  where  exceptional  circumstances  make  this  impossible,  the  requested  Central 
Authority  shall  transmit  the  decision  granting  or  refusing  consent  to  the  requesting  Central 
Authority no later than two months following the receipt of the request. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

35.  The  procedures  for  consultation  or ⌦ obtaining ⌫  consent  referred  to  in  paragraphs  1 
and 2 shall be governed by the national law of the requested ⌦ Member ⌫ State. 

4. Where the authority having jurisdiction under Articles 8 to 15 decides to place the child in 
a foster family, and where such placement is to take place in another Member State and where 
no public authority intervention is required in the latter Member State for domestic cases of 
child placement, it shall so inform the central authority or other authority having jurisdiction 
in the latter State. 

Article 57 66 

Working method 

1.  Any  holder  of  parental  responsibility  may  submit,  (cid:214) Requests  for  assistance  may  be 
submitted   to  the  cCentral  aAuthority  of  the  Member  State  of  his  or  her  ⌦ the 
applicant's ⌫ habitual residence or to the cCentral aAuthority of the Member State where the 
child is habitually resident or present, a request for assistance as mentioned in Article 55. In 
general,  the  request  shall  include  all  available  information  of  relevance  to  its  enforcement 
⌦ execution ⌫ . Where the request for assistance concerns the recognition or enforcement 
of  a  judgment  ⌦ decision ⌫  (cid:214) or  authentic  instrument   on  parental  responsibility  that 
falls within the scope of this Regulation, the holder of parental responsibility (cid:214) applicant  
shall attach the relevant certificates provided for in Articles 39, 41(1) or 42(1) 53 (cid:214) or 56  .  

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the official language or languages of 
the  Community ⌦ Union ⌫  institutions  other  than  their own  in  which  communications  to 
the cCentral aAuthorities can be accepted. 

3.  The  assistance  provided  by  the  cCentral  aAuthorities  pursuant  to  Article  55  ⌦ this 
Regulation ⌫ shall be free of charge. 

4. Each cCentral aAuthority shall bear its own costs. 

EN 

65 

   EN 

 
 
 
Article 58 67 

Meetings 

1.  In  order  to  facilitate  the  application  of  this  Regulation,  cCentral  aAuthorities  shall  meet 
regularly. 

2. These meetings ⌦ of Central Authorities ⌫ shall be convened ⌦ within the framework 
of  the  European  Judicial  Network  in  civil  and  commercial  matters ⌫  in  compliance  with 
Decision No 2001/470/EC establishing a European Judicial Network in civil and commercial 
matters. 

CHAPTER VI 

⌦ GENERAL PROVISIONS ⌫ 

Article 52 68 

Legalisation or other similar formality 

No  legalisation  or  other  similar  formality  shall  be  required  in  respect  of  the  documents 
referred to in Articles 37, 38 and 45 (cid:214) 26,  28, 34, (cid:214) 42, 64 and 65  or in respect of a 
document appointing a representative ad litem ⌦ for the proceedings ⌫ . 

(cid:216) new 

Article 69 

Translations 

1.  Without  prejudice  to  point (a)  of  Article 35(2),  where  a  translation  or  a  transliteration  is 
required  under  this  Regulation,  such  translation  or  transliteration  shall  be  into  the  official 
language of the Member State concerned or, where there are several official languages in that 
Member State, into the official language or one of the official languages of court proceedings 
of the place where a decision given in another Member State is invoked or an application is 
made, in accordance with the law of that Member State. 

2.  The translations or transliterations of the relevant content of the certificates referred to in 
Articles 53 and 56 may be into any other official language or languages of the institutions of 
the Union that the Member State concerned has communicated in accordance with Article 81 
it can accept. 

3.   The courts of the Member State of enforcement may request a translation of the following 
relevant content: 

(a)  in a certificate accompanying a decision granting access rights, point 13.2. relating to the 

arrangements for exercising rights of access; 

(b)  in  a  certificate  accompanying  a  decision  pursuant  to  the  second  subparagraph  of 
Article 26(4) which entails the return of the child, point 15 relating to the measures taken 
to ensure the protection of the child after his or her return to the Member State of habitual 
residence; 

EN 

66 

   EN 

 
(c)  in  a  certificate  accompanying  any  other  decision  in  matters  of  parental  responsibility, 

point 17 which specifies the obligation to be enforced. 

4.  Any translation required for the purposes of Chapter IV of this Regulation shall be done by 
a person qualified to do translations in one of the Member States. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

CHAPTER VII 

(cid:214) DELEGATED ACTS  

Article 69 70 

Amendments to the Annexes 

(cid:214) The  Commission  is  empowered  to  adopt  delegated  acts  in  accordance  with  Article 71 
concerning  the   Any  amendments  ⌦ of ⌫  to  the  standard  forms  in  Annexes  I,  II  to  IV 
(cid:214) and III  shall be adopted in accordance with the consultative procedure set out in Article 
70(2). 

Article 70 71 

Committee ⌦ Exercise of the delegation ⌫ 

1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee (committee). 

2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 3 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall 
apply. 

3. The committee shall adopt its rules of procedure. 

(cid:216) new 

1.  The  power  to  adopt  delegated  acts  is  conferred  on  the  Commission  subject  to  the 
conditions laid down in this Article. 

2.  The  power  to  adopt  delegated  acts  referred  to  in  Article 70  shall  be  conferred  on  the 
Commission  for  an  indeterminate  period  of  time  from  [date  of  entry  into  force  of  this 
Regulation]. 

3.  The  delegation  of  power  referred  to  in  Article 70  may  be  revoked  at  any  time  by  the 
Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that 
decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official 
Journal  of  the  European  Union  or  at  a  later  date  specified  therein.  It  shall  not  affect  the 
validity of any delegated acts already in force. 

4.  Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each 
Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement 
on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. 

EN 

67 

   EN 

 
 
5.  As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it to the Council. 

6.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 70 shall enter into force  only  if no  objection 
has been expressed by the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to 
the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the Council has informed the Commission 
that  it  will  not  object.  That  period  shall  be  extended  by  two  months  at  the  initiative  of  the 
Council. 

7.  The  European  Parliament  shall  be  informed  of  the  adoption  of  delegated  acts  by  the 
Commission,  of  any objection formulated to them, or of the revocation of the delegation of 
powers by the Council. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

CHAPTER VIII 

RELATIONS WITH OTHER INSTRUMENTS 

Article 59 72 

Relation with other instruments 

1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 60, 63, 64 and paragraph 2 of this Article73, 74, (cid:214) 75, 
76,  77 and 78, this Regulation shall, for the Member States, supersede conventions existing 
at the time of entry into force of this Regulation ⌦ (EC) No 2201/2003 ⌫ which have been 
concluded  between  two  or  more  Member  States  and  relate  to  matters  governed  by  this 
Regulation. 

international  private 

2. (a) Finland and Sweden shall have the option of declaring that the Convention of 
6 February  1931  between  Denmark,  Finland,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Sweden 
comprising 
law  provisions  on  marriage,  adoption  and 
guardianship, together with the Final Protocol thereto, will apply, in whole or in part, 
in their mutual relations,  in  place of the rules of this Regulation. Such  declarations 
shall  be  annexed  to  this  Regulation  and  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the 
European Union. They may be withdrawn, in whole or in part, at any moment by the 
said Member States. 

(b)  The  principle  of  non-discrimination  on  the  grounds  of  nationality  between 
citizens of the Union shall be respected. 

(c)  The  rules  of  jurisdiction  in  any  future  agreement  to  be  concluded  between  the 
Member States referred to in subparagraph (a) which relate to matters governed by 
this Regulation shall be in line with those laid down in this Regulation. 

(d)  Judgments  handed  down  in  any  of  the  Nordic  States  which  have  made  the 
declaration  provided  for  in  subparagraph  (a)  under  a  forum  of  jurisdiction 
corresponding  to  one  of  those  laid  down  in  Chapter  II  of  this  Regulation,  shall  be 
recognised  and  enforced  in  the  other  Member  States  under  the  rules  laid  down  in 
Chapter III of this Regulation. 

3. Member States shall send to the Commission: 

EN 

68 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
(a)  a  copy  of  the  agreements  and  uniform  laws  implementing  these  agreements 
referred to in paragraph 2(a) and (c); 

(b) any denunciations of, or amendments to, those agreements or uniform laws. 

Article 60 73 

Relations with certain multilateral conventions 

In relations between Member States, this Regulation shall take precedence over the following 
Conventions in so far as they concern matters governed by this Regulation: 

(a) the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 concerning the Powers of Authorities 
and the Law Applicable in respect of the Protection of Minors; 

(b)  the  Luxembourg  Convention  of  8  September  1967  on  the  Recognition  of 
Decisions Relating to the Validity of Marriages; 

(c) the Hague Convention of 1 June 1970 on the Recognition of Divorces and Legal 
Separations; 

(d)  the  European  Convention  of  20  May  1980  on  Recognition  and  Enforcement  of 
Decisions  concerning  Custody  of  Children  and  on  Restoration  of  Custody  of 
Children;. 

and 

(e) the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International 
Child Abduction. 

(cid:216) new 

Article 74 

Relation with the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of 
International Child Abduction 

Where a child has been wrongfully removed to, or is being wrongfully retained in a Member 
State other than the Member State where the child was habitually resident immediately before 
the  wrongful  removal  or  retention,  the  provisions  of  the  1980  Hague  Convention  shall  be 
applied in accordance with Chapter III of this Regulation. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 61 75 

Relation with the Hague Convention of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable 
lLaw, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in Respect of Parental Responsibility 
and Measures for the Protection of Children 

1. As concerns the relation with the ⌦ 1996 ⌫ Hague Convention of 19 October 1996 on 
Jurisdiction,  Applicable  law,  Recognition,  Enforcement  and  Cooperation  in  Respect  of 
Parental  Responsibility  and  Measures  for  the  Protection  of  Children,  this  Regulation  shall 
apply: 

EN 

69 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(a)  (cid:214) subject  to  paragraph 2,   where  the  child  concerned  has  his  or  her  habitual 
residence on ⌦ in ⌫ the territory of a Member State; 

(b) as concerns the recognition and enforcement of a judgment ⌦ decision ⌫ given 
in  a  court  ⌦ by  an  authority ⌫  of  a  Member  State  on  ⌦ in ⌫  the  territory  of 
another Member State, even if the child concerned has his or her habitual residence 
on  ⌦ in ⌫  the  territory  of  a  third  State  which  is  a  contracting  Party  to  the  said 
Convention (cid:214) and in which this Regulation does not apply  . 

(cid:216) new 

2.  Notwithstanding paragraph 1, 

(a)  where the parties have agreed upon the jurisdiction of an authority in a State Party to the 
1996  Hague  Convention  in  which  this  Regulation  does  not  apply,  Article 10  of  that 
Convention shall apply; 

(b)  with respect to the transfer of jurisdiction between an authority in a Member State and an 
authority in a State Party to the 1996 Hague Convention in which  this Regulation does 
not apply, Articles 8 and 9 of that Convention shall apply; 

(c)  where proceedings relating to parental responsibility are pending before an authority of a 
State Party to the 1996 Hague Convention in which this Regulation does not apply at the 
time when an authority in a Member State is seised of proceedings relating to the same 
child and involving the same cause of action, Article 13 of that Convention shall apply. 

3.  When  applying  Chapter III  –  Applicable  Law  of  the  1996  Hague  Convention  in 
proceedings  before  an  authority  of  a  Member  State,  the  reference  in  Article 15(1)  of  that 
Convention to 'the provisions of Chapter II' of that Convention shall be read as 'the provisions 
of Section 2 of Chapter II of this Regulation'. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 62 76 

Scope of effects 

1.  The  agreements  and  conventions  referred  to  in  Articles  59(1),  60  and  61  72  to  75  shall 
continue to have effect in relation to matters not governed by this Regulation. 

2. The conventions mentioned ⌦ referred to ⌫ in Article 60 Articles 73, 74 (cid:214) and 75  , in 
particular the 1980 (cid:214) and 1996  Hague Conventions, continue to produce effects between 
the  Member  States  which  are  pParty  thereto,  in  compliance  with  Article 60  Articles 73,  74 
(cid:214) and 75.  

Article 63 77 

Treaties with the Holy See 

1.  This  Regulation  shall  apply  without  prejudice  to  the  International  Treaty  (Concordat) 
between the Holy See and Portugal, signed at the Vatican City on 7 May 1940. 

EN 

70 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
2.  Any  decision  as  to  the  invalidity  of  a  marriage  taken  under  the  Treaty  referred  to  in 
paragraph 1 shall be recognised in the Member States on the conditions laid down in Chapter 
III, Section 1 of Chapter IV. 

3.  The  provisions  laid  down  in  paragraphs  1  and  2  shall  also  apply  to  the  following 
international treaties (Concordats) with the Holy See: 

(a)‘Concordato  lateranense’  of  11  February  1929  between  Italy  and  the  Holy  See, 
modified  by  the  agreement,  with  additional  Protocol  signed  in  Rome  on 
18 February 1984; 

(b) Agreement between the Holy See and Spain on legal affairs of 3 January 1979; 

(cid:208) 2116/2004 Art. 1.1 

(c) Agreement between the Holy See and Malta on the recognition of civil effects to 
canonical  marriages  and  to  decisions  of  ecclesiastical  authorities  and  tribunals  on 
those  marriages  of  3  February  1993,  including  the  Protocol  of  application  of  the 
same date, with the second Additional Protocol of 6 January 1995. 

4. Recognition of the decisions provided for in paragraph 2 may, in Spain, Italy or Malta, be 
subject  to  the  same  procedures  and  the  same  checks  as  are  applicable  to  decisions  of  the 
ecclesiastical courts handed down in accordance with the international treaties concluded with 
the Holy See referred to in paragraph 3. 

(cid:208) 2116/2004 Art. 1.2 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

5. Member States shall send to the Commission: 

(a) a copy of the Treaties referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3; 

(b) any denunciations of or amendments to those Treaties. 

CHAPTER VI IX 

TRANSITIONAL ⌦ FINAL ⌫ PROVISIONS 

Article 64 78 

⌦ Transitional provisions ⌫ 

1.  The  provisions  of  tThis  Regulation  shall  apply  only  to  legal  proceedings  instituted,  to 
documents  ⌦ authentic  instruments ⌫  formally  drawn  up  or  registered  as  authentic 
instruments and to agreements (cid:214) approved or  concluded between the parties ⌦ on or ⌫ 
after  its  ⌦ [the ⌫  date  of  application  ⌦ of  this  Regulation] ⌫  in  accordance  with 
Article 72. 

EN 

71 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:216) new 

2.  Regulation  (EC)  No 2201/2003  shall  continue  to  apply  to  decisions  given  in  legal 
proceedings  instituted,  to  authentic  instruments  formally  drawn  up  or  registered  and  to 
agreements approved or concluded before [the date of application of this Regulation] which 
fall within the scope of that Regulation. 

2. Judgments given after  the  date of application of this  Regulation in proceedings instituted 
before that date but after the date of entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 shall 
be  recognised  and  enforced  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Chapter  III  of  this 
Regulation if jurisdiction was founded on rules which accorded with those provided for either 
in Chapter II or in Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 or in a convention concluded between the 
Member  State  of  origin  and  the  Member  State  addressed  which  was  in  force  when  the 
proceedings were instituted. 

3. Judgments given before the date of application of this Regulation in proceedings instituted 
after the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 shall be recognised and enforced 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Chapter  III  of  this  Regulation  provided  they  relate  to 
divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment or parental responsibility for the children of 
both spouses on the occasion of these matrimonial proceedings. 

4. Judgments given before the date of application of this Regulation but after the date of entry 
into force of Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 in proceedings instituted before the date of entry 
into force of Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 shall be recognised and enforced in accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  Chapter  III  of  this  Regulation  provided  they  relate  to  divorce,  legal 
separation or marriage  annulment or parental responsibility for the children of both spouses 
on the occasion of these matrimonial proceedings and that jurisdiction was founded on rules 
which  accorded  with  those  provided  for  either  in  Chapter  II  of  this  Regulation  or  in 
Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/2000  or in a convention concluded between  the  Member State of 
origin  and  the  Member  State  addressed  which  was  in  force  when  the  proceedings  were 
instituted. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

CHAPTER VII 

FINAL PROVISIONS 

Article 65 79 

Review ⌦ Monitoring and Evaluation ⌫ 

No later than 1 January 2012, and every five years thereafter, (cid:214) By [10 years after the date of 
application]  the Commission shall present to the European Parliament, to the Council and 
to  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  a  report  on  the  application  ⌦ ex  post 
evaluation ⌫ of this Regulation on the basis of ⌦ supported by ⌫ information supplied by 
the Member States. The report shall be accompanied if need be ⌦ , where necessary, ⌫ by 
⌦ a legislative ⌫ proposals for adaptations. 

EN 

72 

   EN 

 
 
 
(cid:216) new 

2.  The  Member  States  shall  collect  and  make  available  to  the  Commission  upon  request, 
possibly through the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters, information, 
in particular, on: 

(a)  the number of decisions in matrimonial matters or in matters of parental responsibility in 

which jurisdiction was based on the grounds laid down in this Regulation; 

(b)  with regard to applications  for  enforcement  pursuant to Article 32, the number  of cases 
where enforcement has not occurred within six weeks from the moment the enforcement 
proceedings were initiated; 

(c)  the number of applications for refusal of recognition of a decision pursuant to Article 39 
and, if collection is possible, the number of cases in which the refusal of recognition was 
granted; 

(d)  the number of applications for refusal of enforcement of a decision pursuant to Article 41 
and, if collection is possible, the number of cases in which the refusal of enforcement was 
granted; 

(e)  the number of appeals lodged pursuant to Articles 44 and 45, respectively. 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

Article 66 80 

Member States with two or more legal systems 

With  regard  to  a  Member  State  in  which  two  or  more  systems  of  law  or  sets  of  rules 
concerning matters governed by this Regulation apply in different territorial units: 

(a)  any  reference  to  habitual  residence  in  that  Member  State  shall  refer  to  habitual 
residence in a territorial unit; 

(b)  any  reference  to  nationality,  or  in  the  case  of  the  United  Kingdom  ‘domicile’, 
shall refer to the territorial unit designated by the law of that ⌦ Member ⌫ State; 

(c) any reference to the authority of a Member State shall refer to the authority of a 
territorial unit within that ⌦ Member ⌫ State which is concerned; 

(d) any reference to the rules of the requested Member State shall refer to the rules of 
the territorial unit in which jurisdiction, recognition or enforcement is invoked. 

Article 67 81 

Information on central authorities and languages accepted ⌦ to be communicated to 
the Commission ⌫ 

1. The Member States shall communicate to the Commission within three months following 
the entry into force of this Regulation ⌦ the following ⌫ : 

(a) the names, addresses and means of communication for the cCentral aAuthorities 
designated pursuant to Article 5360; 

EN 

73 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(b) the languages accepted for communications to cCentral aAuthorities pursuant to 
Article 57(2) 66(2); 

and 

(c) the languages accepted for the certificate concerning rights of access pursuant to 
Article 45(2).  (cid:214) translations  pursuant  to  the  second  subparagraph  of  Article 26(2), 
Article 64(4), Article 65(2), and Article 69(2);  

Article 68 

Information relating to courts and redress procedures 

(d) The Member States shall notify to the Commission the lists of courts ⌦ referred 
in ⌫  (cid:214) Article 16,  Article 32(1),   ⌦ Article 41(1),  Article 44(2)  and 

to 
Article 45; ⌫ 

(e) and ⌦ the ⌫ redress procedures referred to in Articles 21, 29, 33 and 34 44 and 

45 and any amendments thereto. 

2.  The  Member  States  shall  communicate  the  information  referred  to  in  paragraph 1  to  the 
Commission  by  [three  months  following  the  entry  into  force  of  this  Regulation  –  OPOCE, 
please replace with actual date]. 

(cid:216) new 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 
(cid:214) new 

The  Commission  shall  update  this  information  and  make  it  publicly  available  through  the 
publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and any other appropriate means. 

3. The Member States shall communicate to the Commission any changes to this ⌦ that ⌫ 
information. 

4.  The  Commission  shall  make  this  ⌦ the ⌫  information  publicly  available  ⌦ through 
appropriate means, ⌫ (cid:214)  including through the European e-Justice Portal  . 

Article 71 82 

Repeal of Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 

1.  (cid:214) Subject  to  Article 78(2),   Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/2000 ⌦ 2201/2003 ⌫  shall  be 
⌦ is ⌫ repealed as from [the date of application of this Regulation]. 

2.  Any  reference  ⌦ References ⌫  to  ⌦ the  repealed ⌫  Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/2000 
shall  be  construed  as  a  reference  ⌦ references ⌫  to  this  Regulation  according  to  ⌦ and 
shall be read in accordance with ⌫ the comparative ⌦ correlation ⌫ table in Annex V. 

Article 72 83 

Entry into force 

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 August 2004 ⌦ the twentieth day following that 
of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union ⌫ . 

EN 

74 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
The Regulation shall apply from 1 March 2005 ⌦ […] ⌫ , with the exception of Articles 
67, 68, 69 and 70 70, 71 and 81, which shall apply from 1 August 2004 ⌦ [the date of entry 
into force of this Regulation] ⌫ . 

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in 
accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community ⌦ Treaties ⌫ . 

Done at Brussels, 

For the Council 
The President 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

ANNEX I 

CERTIFICATE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 39 53 CONCERNING JUDGMENTS 
⌦ DECISIONS ⌫ IN MATRIMONIAL MATTERS49 50 

1. Member State of origin 

⌦ □  Belgium  (BE)  □  Bulgaria  (BG)  □  Czech  Republic  (CZ)  □  Germany  (DE)  □  Estonia 
(EE)  

□ Ireland (IE) □ Greece (EL) □ Spain (ES) □ France (FR) □ Croatia (HR) □ Italy (IT)  

□ Cyprus (CY) □ Latvia (LV) □ Lithuania □ Luxembourg (LU) □ Hungary (HU)  

□ Malta (MT) □ Netherlands (NL) □ Austria (AT) □ Poland (PL) □ Portugal (PT)  

□ Romania (RO) □ Slovenia (SI) □ Slovakia (SK) □ Finland (FI) □ Sweden (SE)  

□ United Kingdom (UK) ⌫ 

2. COURT OR ⌦ AUTHORITY ⌫ ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE 

2.1. Name 

2.2. Address 

2.3. Tel./fax/e-mail 

3. MARRIAGE 

3.1. Wife 

3.1.1. Full name 

3.1.2. Address 

3.1.3. Country and place of birth 

49 

50 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201/2003  of  27  November  2003  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental 
responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000. 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  xxxx/20xx  of  xx  xxxxxr  20xx  on  jurisdiction,  the  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  decisions  in  matrimonial  matters  and  in  matters  of  parental  responsibility,  and  on 
international child abduction. 

EN 

75 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.1.4. Date of birth 

3.2. Husband 

3.2.1. Full name 

3.2.2. Address 

3.2.3. Country and place of birth 

3.2.4. Date of birth 

3.3. Country, place (where available) and date of marriage 

3.3.1. Country of marriage 

3.3.2. Place of marriage (where available) 

3.3.3. Date of marriage 

4. COURT WHICH DELIVERED THE JUDGMENT 

4.1. Name of Court 

4.2. Place of Court 

5. JUDGMENT 

5.1. Date 

5.2. Reference number 

5.3. Type of judgment 

5.3.1. Divorce 

5.3.2. Marriage annulment 

5.3.3. Legal separation 

5.4. Was the judgment given in default of appearance? 

5.4.1. No 
5.4.2. Yes51 

6. Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted 

7.  IS  THE  JUDGMENT  SUBJECT  TO  FURTHER  APPEAL  UNDER  THE  LAW  OF  THE  MEMBER 

STATE OF ORIGIN? 

7.1. No 

7.2. Yes 

8. DATE OF LEGAL EFFECT IN THE MEMBER STATE WHERE THE JUDGMENT WAS GIVEN 

8.1. Divorce 

8.2. Legal separation 

⌦ 3. Authority which gave the decision 

51 

Documents referred to in Article 37(2) must be attached. 

EN 

76 

   EN 

                                                 
3.1.  Name of the authority 

3.2. 

Place of the authority 

4.  Decision 

4.1.  Date 

4.2.  Reference number 

4.3. 

Type of decision 

4.3.1.  Divorce 

4.3.2.  Marriage annulment 

4.3.3.  Legal separation 

4.4.  Was the decision given in default of appearance? 

4.4.1.  No 

4.4.2.  Yes ⌫ 

5.  Where the decision was given in default of appearance: 

(cid:216) new 

5.1. 

The  person  defaulting  was  served  with  the  document  which  instituted  the 
proceedings  or  with  an  equivalent  document  in  sufficient  time  and  in  such  a 
way as to enable that person to arrange for his or her defense. 

5.1.1.  Yes 

5.1.2.  No 

5.2. 

The  person  has  been  served  with  the  document  but  not  in  compliance  with 
these conditions, but it is nevertheless established that he or she accepted the 
decision unequivocally. 

5.2.1.  Yes 

5.2.2.  No  

⌦ 6. Marriage 

6.1.  Wife 

6.1.1.  Full name 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

EN 

77 

   EN 

 
 
 
   
 
   
 
 
6.1.2.  Address 

6.1.3.  Country and place of birth 

6.1.4.  Date of birth 

6.2.  Husband 

6.2.1.  Full name 

6.2.2.  Address 

6.2.3.  Country and place of birth 

6.2.4.  Date of birth 

6.3.  Country, place (where available) and date of marriage 

6.3.1. Country of marriage 

6.3.2. Place of marriage (where available) 

6.3.3. Date of marriage 

7.  Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted 

8. 

Is the decision subject to further appeal under the law of the Member State of origin? 

8.1.  No 

8.2.  Yes 

9.  Date of legal effect in the Member State where the decision was given 

9.1.  Divorce 

9.2. 

Legal separation ⌫ 

10. 

Costs52: 

10.1.  Currency: 

(cid:216) new 

□ euro (EUR) □ Bulgarian lev (BGN) □ Croatian kuna (HRK) □ Czech koruna (CZK) 
□ Hungarian forint (HUF) □ Polish zloty (PLN) □ Pound Sterling (GBP) □ Romanian 
leu (RON) □ Swedish krona (SEK) □ Other (please specify (ISO code)): 

10.2.  The following person(s) against whom enforcement is sought has/have been 

ordered to bear the costs: 

52 

This point also covers situations where the costs are awarded in a separate decision. 

EN 

78 

   EN 

 
                                                 
10.2.1. Full name 

10.2.2. If more than one person has been ordered to bear the costs, the whole 

amount may be collected from any one of them: 

10.2.2.1. 

□ Yes 

10.2.2.2. 

□ No 

10.3.  The costs of which recovery is sought are as follows53: 

10.3.1. □ The costs have been fixed in the decision by way of a total amount 

(please specify amount): 

10.3.2. □ The costs have been fixed in the decision by way of a percentage of 

total costs (please specify percentage of total): 

10.3.3. □ Liability for the costs has been determined in the decision and the 

exact amounts are as follows: 

10.3.3.1. 

□ Court fees: 

10.3.3.2. 

□ Lawyers’ fees: 

10.3.3.3. 

□ Cost of service of documents: 

10.3.3.4. 

□ Other: 

10.3.4. □ Other (please specify): 

10.4. 

Interest on costs: 

10.4.1. □ Not applicable 

10.4.2. □ Interest specified in the decision 

10.4.2.1. 

□ Amount: 

or 

10.4.2.2. 

□ Rate … % 

10.4.2.2.1. 

Interest due from ….. (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event) to 
….. (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event)54 

10.4.3. □ Statutory interest (if applicable) to be calculated in accordance with 

(please specify relevant statute): 

53 

54 

In the event that the costs may be recovered from several persons, insert the breakdown for each person 
separately. 
Insert information for all periods if more than one. 

EN 

79 

   EN 

                                                 
10.4.3.1. 

Interest due from ..... (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event) to 
..... (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event)55  

10.4.4. □ Capitalisation of interest (if applicable, please specify): 

Done at …, date … 

Signature and/or stamp 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 

55 

Insert information for all periods if more than one. 

EN 

80 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

ANNEX II 

CERTIFICATE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 39 53 CONCERNING JUDGMENTS 
⌦ DECISIONS ⌫ ON PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY5657 ⌦ , INCLUDING 
RIGHTS OF ACCESS; OR THE RETURN OF THE CHILD ⌫ 

1. Member State of origin 

⌦ □  Belgium  (BE)  □  Bulgaria  (BG)  □  Czech  Republic  (CZ)  □  Germany  (DE)  □  Estonia 
(EE)  
□ Ireland (IE) □ Greece (EL) □ Spain (ES) □ France (FR) □ Croatia (HR) □ Italy (IT)  
□ Cyprus (CY) □ Latvia (LV) □ Lithuania (LT) □ Luxembourg (LU) □ Hungary (HU)  
□ Malta (MT) □ Netherlands (NL) □ Austria (AT) □ Poland (PL) □ Portugal (PT)  
□ Romania (RO) □ Slovenia (SI) □ Slovakia (SK) □ Finland (FI) □ Sweden (SE)  
□ United Kingdom (UK) ⌫ 

2. COURT OR AUTHORITY ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE 

2.1. Name 

2.2. Address 

2.3. Tel./Fax/e-mail 

3. PERSON(S) WITH RIGHTS OF ACCESS 

3.1. Full name 

3.2. Address 

3.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4. HOLDERS OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY OTHER THAN THOSE MENTIONED UNDER 358 

4.1. 4.1.1. Full name 

4.1.2. Address 

4.1.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4.2. 4.2.1. Full Name 

4.2.2. Address 

4.2.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4.3. 4.3.1. Full name 

4.3.2. Address 

56 

57 

58 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201/2003  of  27  November  2003  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental 
responsibility. 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  xxxx/20xx  of  xx  xxxxx  20xx  on  jurisdiction,  the  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  decisions  in  matrimonial  matters  and  in  matters  of  parental  responsibility,  and  on 
international child abduction, repealing Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003. 
In cases of joint custody, a person already mentioned under item 3 may also be mentioned under item 4. 

EN 

81 

   EN 

 
                                                 
4.3.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

5. COURT WHICH DELIVERED THE JUDGMENT 

5.1. Name of Court 

5.2. Place of Court 

6. JUDGMENT 

6.1. Date 

6.2. Reference number 

6.3. Was the judgment given in default of appearance? 

6.3.1. No 
6.3.2. Yes59 

7. CHILDREN WHO ARE COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT

60 

7.1. Full name and date of birth 

7.2. Full name and date of birth 

7.3. Full name and date of birth 

7.4. Full name and date of birth 

8. Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted 

9. ATTESTATION OF ENFORCEABILITY AND SERVICE 

9.1. Is the judgment enforceable according to the law of the Member State of origin? 

9.1.1. Yes 

9.1.2. No 

9.2. Has the judgment been served on the party against whom enforcement is sought? 

9.2.1. Yes 

9.2.1.1. Full name of the party 

9.2.1.2. Address 

9.2.1.3. Date of service 

9.2.2. No 

59 
60 

Documents referred to in Article 37(2) must be attached. 
If more than four children are covered, use a second form. 

EN 

82 

   EN 

                                                 
10. SPECIFIC INFORMATION ON JUDGMENTS ON RIGHTS OF ACCESS WHERE ‘EXEQUATUR’ IS 
REQUESTED UNDER ARTICLE 28. THIS POSSIBILITY IS FORESEEN IN ARTICLE 40(2). 

10.1. Practical arrangements for exercise of rights of access (to the extent stated in the 

judgment) 

10.1.1. Date and time 

10.1.1.1. Start 

10.1.1.2. End 

10.1.2. Place 

10.1.3. Specific obligations on holders of parental responsibility 

10.1.4. Specific obligations on the person with right of access 

10.1.5. Any restrictions attached to the exercise of rights of access 

11.  SPECIFIC  INFORMATION  FOR  JUDGMENTS  ON  THE  RETURN  OF  THE  CHILD  IN  CASES 
WHERE  THE  ‘EXEQUATUR’  PROCEDURE  IS  REQUESTED  UNDER  ARTICLE  28.  THIS 
POSSIBILITY IS FORESEEN UNDER ARTICLE 40(2). 

11.1. The judgment entails the return of the child 

11.2. Person to whom the child is to be returned (to the extent stated in the judgment) 

11.2.1. Full name 

11.2.2 Address 

⌦ 3. Authority which gave the decision 

3.1.  Name of the authority 

3.2. 

Place of the authority 

4.  Decision 

4.1.  Date 

4.2.  Reference number 

5.  Holders of parental responsibility 

5.1. 

Parent 1 

5.1.1.  Full name 

5.1.2.  Address 

5.1.3.  Date and place of birth (where available) 

5.2. 

Parent 2 

5.2.1.  Full name 

5.2.2.  Address 

EN 

83 

   EN 

5.2.3.  Date and place of birth (where available) 

5.3.  Other holder of parental responsibility 

5.3.1.  Full name 

5.3.2.  Address 

5.3.3.  Date and place of birth (where available) 

6. 

Children who are covered by the decision61 

6.1.  Child 1 

6.1.1  Full name 

6.1.2.   Date of birth 

6.1.3.  Address 

6.2.  Child 2 

6.2.1.  Full name 

6.2.2.  Date of birth 

6.2.3.  Address 

6.3.  Child 3 

6.3.1.  Full name 

6.3.2.  Date of birth 

6.3.3.  Address 

6.4.  Child 4 

6.4.1.  Full name 

6.4.2.  Date of birth 

6.4.3.  Address 

7.  Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted 

8.  Attestation of enforceability and service 

8.1. 

Is the decision enforceable according to the law of the Member State of origin? 

8.1.1.  Yes 

61 

If more than four children are covered, use a second form. 

EN 

84 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
8.1.2.  No 

8.2.  Has the decision been served on the party against whom enforcement is 

sought? 

8.2.1.  Yes 

8.2.1.1. 

Full name of the party 

8.2.1.2. 

Address 

8.2.1.3. 

Date of service 

8.2.2.  No 

9.  Where the decision was given in default of appearance: 

9.1. 

The  person  defaulting  was  served  with  the  document  which  instituted  the 
proceedings  or  with  an  equivalent  document  in  sufficient  time  and  in  such  a 
way as to enable that person to arrange for his or her defense. 

9.1.1.  Yes 

9.1.2.  No 

9.2. 

The  person  has  been  served  with  the  document  but  not  in  compliance  with 
these conditions, but it is nevertheless established that he or she accepted the 
decision unequivocally. 

9.2.1.  Yes 

9.2.2.  No 

10.  All parties concerned were given an opportunity to be heard. 

10.1.  Yes 

10.2.  No ⌫ 

11.  The child was given a genuine and effective opportunity to express his or her views. 

(cid:216) new 

11.1.  Yes 

12.  Due weight was given to the child's views. 

12.1.  Yes 

EN 

85 

   EN 

 
 
   
 
   
 
 
 
 
⌦ 13. Specific information on decisions granting rights of access 
13.1.  Person(s) who was/were granted rights of access62 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

13.1.1. Full name 

13.1.2. Address 

13.1.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

13.2.  Practical arrangements for the exercise of rights of access (to the extent stated 

in the decision) 

13.2.1. Date and time 

13.2.1.1. 

Start 

13.2.1.2. 

End 

13.2.2. Place 

13.2.3. Specific obligations on holders of parental responsibility 

13.2.4. Specific obligations on the person granted rights of access 

13.2.5. Any restrictions attached to the exercise of rights of access 

14.  Specific information on decisions entailing the return of the child 

14.1.  The decision entails the return of the child 

14.2.  Person to whom the child is to be returned (to the extent stated in the decision) 

14.2.1. Full name 

14.2.2. Address ⌫ 

(cid:216) new 

15.  Where  applicable,  details  of  measures  taken  by  courts  or  authorities  to  ensure  the 
protection of the child during or after his or her return to the Member State of habitual 
residence: 

16.  The decision was based on the second subparagraph of Article 26(4) of the Regulation 
and entails the return of the child(ren); and the court has taken into account in giving its 
decision  the  reasons  for  and  evidence  underlying  the  decision  given  pursuant  to 

62 

In  cases  of  joint  custody,  a  person  already  mentioned  under  point 5  may  also  be  mentioned  under 
point 13.1. 

EN 

86 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Article 13  of  the  Hague  Convention  of  25  October  1980  on  the  Civil  Aspects  of 
International Child Abduction: 

16.1.  Yes 

16.2.  No 

17.  Specific information on any other decision in matters of parental responsibility: 

17.1.  Description of the obligation to be enforced: 

18. 

Costs63: 

18.1.  Currency: 

□ euro (EUR) □ Bulgarian lev (BGN) □ Croatian kuna (HRK) □ Czech koruna (CZK) 
□ Hungarian forint (HUF) □ Polish zloty (PLN) □ Pound Sterling (GBP) □ Romanian 
leu (RON) □ Swedish krona (SEK) □ Other (please specify (ISO code)): 

18.2.  The following person(s) against whom enforcement is sought has/have been 

ordered to bear the costs: 

18.2.1. Full name 

18.2.2. If more than one person has been ordered to bear the costs, the whole 

amount may be collected from any one of them: 

18.2.2.1. 

□ Yes 

18.2.2.2. 

□ No 

18.3.  The costs of which recovery is sought are as follows64: 

18.3.1. □ The costs have been fixed in the decision by way of a total amount 

(please specify amount): 

18.3.2. □ The costs have been fixed in the decision by way of a percentage of 

total costs (please specify percentage of total): 

18.3.3. □ Liability for the costs has been determined in the decision and the 

exact amounts are as follows: 

18.3.3.1. 

□ Court fees: 

18.3.3.2. 

□ Lawyers’ fees: 

18.3.3.3. 

□ Cost of service of documents: 

63 
64 

This point also covers situations where the costs are awarded in a separate decision. 
In the event that the costs may be recovered from several persons, insert the breakdown for each person 
separately. 

EN 

87 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
18.3.3.4. 

□ Other: 

18.3.4. □ Other (please specify): 

18.4. 

Interest on costs: 

18.4.1. □ Not applicable 

18.4.2. □ Interest specified in the decision 

18.4.2.1. 

□ Amount: 

or 

18.4.2.2. 

□ Rate … % 

18.4.2.2.1. 

Interest due from ….. (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event) to 
….. (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event)65 

18.4.3. □ Statutory interest (if applicable) to be calculated in accordance with 

(please specify relevant statute): 

18.4.3.1. 

Interest due from ..... (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event) to 
..... (date (dd/mm/yyyy) or event)66  

18.4.4. □ Capitalisation of interest (if applicable, please specify): 

Done at …, date …. 

Signature and/or stamp 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 

65 
66 

Insert information for all periods if more than one. 
Insert information for all periods if more than one. 

EN 

88 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

ANNEX III 

CERTIFICATE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 41(1) CONCERNING JUDGMENTS 
ON RIGHTS OF ACCESS67 

1. Member State of origin 

2. COURT OR AUTHORITY ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE 

2.1. Name 

2.2. Address 

2.3. Tel./fax/e-mail 

3. PERSON(S) WITH RIGHTS OF ACCESS 

3.1. Full name 

3.2. Address 

3.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4. HOLDERS OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY OTHER THAN THOSE MENTIONED UNDER 36869 

4.1. 4.1.1. Full name 

4.1.2. Address 

4.1.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4.2. 4.2.1. Full name 

4.2.2. Address 

4.2.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4.3. Other 

4.3.1. Full name 

4.3.2. Address 

4.3.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

5. COURT WHICH DELIVERED THE JUDGMENT 

5.1. Name of Court 

5.2. Place of Court 

67 

68 
69 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201/2003  of  27  November  2003  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental 
responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000. 
In cases of joint custody, a person already mentioned under item 3 may also be mentioned in item 4. 
Please  put  a  cross  in  the  box  corresponding  to  the  person  against  whom  the  judgment  should  be 
enforced. 

EN 

89 

   EN 

 
                                                 
6. JUDGMENT 

6.1. Date 

6.2. Reference number 

7. CHILDREN WHO ARE COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT

70 

7.1. Full name and date of birth 

7.2. Full name and date of birth 

7.3. Full name and date of birth 

7.4. Full name and date of birth 

8. IS THE JUDGMENT ENFORCEABLE IN THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN? 

8.1. Yes 

8.2. No 

9. Where the judgment was given in default of appearance, the person defaulting was served 
with  the  document  which  instituted  the  proceedings  or  with  an  equivalent  document  in 
sufficient time and in such a way as to enable that person to arrange for his or her defence, or 
the person has been served with the document but not in compliance with these conditions, it 
is nevertheless established that he or she accepted the decision unequivocally 

10. All parties concerned were given an opportunity to be heard. 

11.  The  children  were  given  an  opportunity  to  be  heard,  unless  a  hearing  was  considered 
inappropriate having regard to their age or degree of maturity 

12.  PRACTICAL  ARRANGEMENTS  FOR  EXERCISE  OF  RIGHTS  OF  ACCESS  (TO  THE  EXTENT 

STATED IN THE JUDGMENT) 

12.1. Date and time 

12.1.1. Start 

12.1.2. End 

12.2. Place 

12.3. Specific obligations on holders of parental responsibility 

12.4. Specific obligations on the person with right of access 

12.5. Any restrictions attached to the exercise of rights of access 

13. Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted 

Done at …, date …. 

Signature and/or stamp 

70 

If more than four children are concerned, use a second form. 

EN 

90 

   EN 

                                                 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

ANNEX IV 

CERTIFICATE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 42(1) CONCERNING THE RETURN 
OF THE CHILD71 

1. Member State of origin 

2. COURT OR AUTHORITY ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE 

2.1. Name 

2.2. Address 

2.3. Tel./fax/e-mail 

3.  PERSON  TO  WHOM  THE  CHILD  HAS  TO  BE  RETURNED  (TO  THE  EXTENT  STATED  IN  THE 

JUDGMENT) 

3.1. Full name 

3.2. Address 

3.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4. HOLDERS OF PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY

72 

4.1. Mother 

4.1.1. Full name 

4.1.2. Address (where available) 

4.1.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4.2. Father 

4.2.1. Full name 

4.2.2. Address (where available) 

4.2.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

4.3. Other 

4.3.1. Full name 

4.3.2. Address (where available) 

4.3.3. Date and place of birth (where available) 

5. RESPONDENT (WHERE AVAILABLE) 

5.1. Full name 

5.2. Address (where available) 

71 

72 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201  of  27  November  2003  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition 
and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental  responsibility, 
repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000. 
This item is optional. 

EN 

91 

   EN 

 
                                                 
6. COURT WHICH DELIVERED THE JUDGMENT 

6.1. Name of Court 

6.2. Place of Court 

7. JUDGMENT 

7.1. Date 

7.2. Reference number 

8. CHILDREN WHO ARE COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT

73 

8.1. Full name and date of birth 

8.2. Full name and date of birth 

8.3. Full name and date of birth 

8.4. Full name and date of birth 

9. The judgment entails the return of the child 

10. IS THE JUDGMENT ENFORCEABLE IN THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN? 

10.1. Yes 

10.2. No 

11.  The  children  were  given  an  opportunity  to  be  heard,  unless  a  hearing  was  considered 
inappropriate having regard to their age or degree of maturity 

12. The parties were given an opportunity to be heard 

13.  The  judgment  entails  the  return  of  the  children  and  the  court  has  taken  into  account  in 
issuing its judgment the reasons for and evidence underlying the decision issued pursuant to 
Article 13 of the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International 
Child Abduction 

14.  Where  applicable,  details  of  measures  taken  by  courts  or  authorities  to  ensure  the 
protection of the child after its return to the Member State of habitual residence 

15. Names of parties to whom legal aid has been granted 

Done at …, date …. 

Signature and/or stamp 

73 

If more than four children are covered, use a second form. 

EN 

92 

   EN 

                                                 
(cid:216) new 

ANNEX III 

CERTIFICATE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 56 CONCERNING AN AUTHENTIC 
INSTRUMENT OR AN AGREEMENT74 

1. 

AUTHORITY ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE 

1.1.  Name: 

1.2.  Address: 

1.2.1.  Street and number/PO box: 

1.2.2.  Place and postal code: 

1.2.3.  Member State: 

□ Belgium (BE) □ Bulgaria (BG) □ Czech Republic (CZ) □ Germany (DE) □ Estonia (EE)  
□ Ireland (IE) □ Greece (EL) □ Spain (ES) □ France (FR) □ Croatia (HR) □ Italy (IT)  
□ Cyprus (CY) □ Latvia (LV) □ Lithuania (LT) □ Luxembourg (LU) □ Hungary (HU)  
□ Malta (MT) □ Netherlands (NL) □ Austria (AT) □ Poland (PL) □ Portugal (PT)  
□ Romania (RO) □ Slovenia (SI) □ Slovakia (SK) □ Finland (FI) □ Sweden (SE)  
□ United Kingdom (UK) 

1.3. 

Telephone: 

1.4. 

Fax 

1.5. 

E-mail (if available): 

2. 

AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT 

2.1.  Authority  which  has  drawn  up  the  authentic  instrument  (if  different  from  the 

authority issuing the certificate) 

2.1.1.  Name and designation of authority: 

2.1.2.  Address: 

2.2.  Date  (dd/mm/yyyy)  on  which  the  authentic  instrument  was  drawn  up  by  the 

authority referred to in point 2.1: 

2.3.  Reference number of the authentic instrument (if applicable): 

74 

Article 56 of Council Regulation ____ on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of decisions 
in matrimonial  matters and in matters of parental responsibility, and on international child abduction, 
repealing Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003. 

EN 

93 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.4.  Date  (dd/mm/yyyy)  on  which  the  authentic  instrument  was  registered  in  the 
Member  State  of  origin  (to  be  filled  in  only  if  the  date  of  registration 
determines the legal effect of the instrument and this date is different from the 
date indicated in point 2.2): 

2.4.1.  Reference number in the register (if applicable): 

3. 

AGREEMENT 

3.1.  Authority  which  approved  the  agreement  or  before  which  the  agreement  was 

concluded (if different from the authority issuing the certificate) 

3.1.1.  Name of authority: 

3.1.2.  Address: 

3.2.  Date (dd/mm/yyyy) of the agreement: 

3.3.  Reference number of the agreement: 

4. 

PARTIES TO THE AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT/AGREEMENT 

4.1. 

Full name of first party: 

4.1.1.  Address: 

4.1.2  Date and place of birth (where available): 

4.2. 

Full name of second party: 

4.2.1.  Address: 

4.2.2  Date and place of birth (where available) 

4.3. 

Full name of other party, if any: 

4.3.1.  Address: 

4.3.2  Date and place of birth (where available): 

5. 

ENFORCEABILITY OF THE AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENT/AGREEMENT IN 
THE MEMBER STATE OF ORIGIN 

5.1. 

The  authentic  instrument/agreement  is  enforceable  in  the  Member  State  of 
origin 

5.1.1.  □ Yes 

5.1.2.  □ No 

5.2. 

Terms of the authentic instrument/agreement 

EN 

94 

   EN 

 
5.2.1.  Short description of the enforceable obligation: 

5.2.2.2. 

The  obligation  referred  to  in  point  5.2  is  enforceable 
against the following person(s)75 (full name): 

Done at: … 

Signature and/or stamp of the authority of origin: 

(cid:208) 2201/2003 

75 

Insert information for all persons if more than one. 

EN 

95 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

ANNEX V 

COMPARATIVE TABLE WITH REGULATION (EC) No 1347/2000 

Articles repealed  Corresponding Articles of new text 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

1, 2 

3 

12 

4 

5 

6 

7 

17 

18 

16, 19 

20 

2, 49, 46 

21 

22, 23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

21, 29 

30 

96 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

Annex I 

Annex II 

Annex III 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

50 

51 

37 

39 

38 

52 

59 

60, 61 

62 

63 

66 

64 

65 

68, 69 

70 

72 

68 

68 

68 

Annex IV 

Annex I 

EN 

97 

   EN 

 
Annex V 

Annex II 

EN 

98 

   EN 

 
(cid:208) 2201/2003 (adapted) 

ANNEX VI 

Declarations  by Sweden and Finland  pursuant  to  Article 59(2)(a) of the Council  Regulation 
concerning  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial 
matters and matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000. 

DECLARATION BY SWEDEN: 

Pursuant  to  Article  59(2)(a)  of  the  Council  Regulation  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  matters  of  parental 
responsibility,  repealing  Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/2000,  Sweden  hereby  declares  that  the 
Convention  of  6 February  1931  between  Denmark,  Finland,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Sweden 
comprising  international  private  law  provisions  on  marriage,  adoption  and  guardianship, 
together  with  the  Final  Protocol  thereto,  will  apply  in  full  in  relations  between  Sweden  and 
Finland, in place of the rules of the Regulation. 

DECLARATION BY FINLAND: 

Pursuant  to  Article  59(2)(a)  of  the  Council  Regulation  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  matters  of  parental 
responsibility,  repealing  Regulation  (EC)  No  1347/2000,  Finland  hereby  declares  that  the 
Convention  of  6 February 1931  between  Finland,  Denmark,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Sweden 
comprising  international  private  law  provisions  on  marriage,  adoption  and  guardianship, 
together  with  the  Final  Protocol  thereto,  will apply  in  full  in  relations  between  Finland  and 
Sweden, in place of the rules of the Regulation. 

EN 

99 

   EN 

 
(cid:207) 

ANNEX IV 

Repealed Regulation with the amendment thereto 

Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003   
(OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1)  

Council Regulation (EC) No 2116/2004 
(OJ L 367, 14.12.2004, p. 1) 

EN 

100 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX V 

Correlation Table 

Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 

This Regulation 

Article 1 

Article 1 

Article 2, introductory wording 

Article 2, introductory wording 

Article 2(1) to (6) 

Article 2(1) to (6) 

- 

Article 2(7) 

Article 2(8) 

Article 2(9) 

Article 2(10) 

Article 2(11) 

Article 2(7) 

Article 2(8) 

Article 2(9) 

Article 2(10) 

Article 2(11) 

Article 2(12) 

Articles 3, 4 and 5 

Articles 3, 4 and 5 

Article 6 

Article 7(1) 

Article 7(2) 

Article 8 

Article 9 

Article 6(2) 

Article 6(1) 

Article 6(3) 

Article 7 

Article 8 

Article 10, introductory wording 

Article 9, introductory wording 

Article 10(a) 

Article 9(a) 

Article 10(b), introductory wording 

Article 9(b), introductory wording 

Article 10(b)(i) and (ii) 

Article 9(b)(i) and (ii) 

- 

Article 10(b)(iii) 

Article 10(b)(iv) 

Article 11(1) 

Article 11(2) 

Article 9(b)(iii) 

Article 9(b)(iv) 

Article 9(b)(v) 

Article 21 

Article 24 

EN 

101 

   EN 

Article 11(3) 

Article 11(4) 

Article 11(5) 

Article 11(6) 

Article 11(7) 

Article 11(8) 

Article 12(1) 

Article 12(2) 

Article 12(3) 

- 

Article 12(4) 

Article 13 

Article 14 

Article 15 

Article 16 

- 

Article 23(1) 

Article 25(1) 

Article 25(2) 

Article 26(2) 

Article 26(3) 

Article 26(4) 

Article 10(1) 

Article 10(2) 

Article 10(3) 

Article 10(4) and (5) 

Article 10(6) 

Article 11 

Article 13 

Article 14 

Article 15 

Article 16 

Article 17, 18, and 19 

Articles 17, 18, and 19 

- 

Article 20 

Article 21 

- 

Article 22 

Article 20 

Article 12 

Article 27 

Article 28 

Article 37 

Article 23(a) (c), (d), (e), (f) 

Article 38(1)  

Article 23(b), (g) 

Article 24, 25, 26 

Article 27 

- 

Article 28 to 36 

- 

- 

Articles 50, 51,52 

Article 29(a) 

Article 29(b), (c) 

- 

Articles 30 to 32 

EN 

102 

   EN 

- 

- 

Article 37(1) 

- 

Article 37(2) 

- 

Article 38 

Article 39 

Article 40 

Article 41(1) 

Article 41(2), (3) 

Article 42(1) 

Article 42(2) 

- 

Article 43 

Article 44 

Article 45(1) 

Article 45(2) 

Article 46 

- 

Article 47(1) 

- 

Article 47(2) 

Article 48 

- 

Articles 35, 36 

Articles 39 to 49 

Article 28(1) 

Article 28(2) 

- 

Articles 34(2), (3) 

- 

Article 53(1), (2) 

- 

Articles 30(2), 38(2), 53(2) 

Article 53(2) 

Articles 38(2), 53(2) 

Article 53(3) to (6) 

Article 54(1), (2) 

Article 54(3), (4) 

Article 53(7) 

Article 34(1) 

Article 34(2), (3), 69 

Article 55 

Article 56 

Article 31(1) 

Article 31(2) 

- 

Article 33(1) 

Article 33(2) 

Article 49, 50, 51 

Articles 57, 58,59 

Article 52 

Article 53 

- 

Article 54 

Article 68 

Article 60 

Article 61 

Article 62 

Article 55, introductory wording 

Art. 63(1) introductory wording, Art. 63(2) 

- 

EN 

Article 63(1)(a) 

103 

   EN 

Article 55(a) 

Article 55(b) to (e) 

- 

- 

- 

Article 56(1) 

- 

Article 56(2) 

- 

Article 56(3) 

Article 56(4) 

Article 57, 58 

- 

Article 59(1) 

Article 59(2), (3) 

Article 60(a) to (d) 

Article 60(e) 

Article 61 

- 

Article 62, 63, 64 

Article 65 

- 

Article 66 

Article 67, 68 

Article 69, 70 

- 

Article 71, 72 

Annex I 

Annex II 

Annex III 

Annex IV 

- 

Articles 63(1)(b), 64(1)(a) 

Article 63(1)(c)  to (f) 

Article 63(1)(g) 

Article 63(3), (4) 

Article 64(1)(b), (2) to (6) 

Article 65(1) 

Article 65(2) 

Article 65(3) 

Article 65(4) 

Article 65(5) 

- 

Article 66, 67 

Article 69 

Article 72 

- 

Article 73 

Article 74 

Article 75(1) 

Article 75(2), (3) 

Article 76, 77, 78 

Article 79(1) 

Article 79(2) 

Article 80 

Article 81 

- 

Article 70, 71 

Article 82, 83 

Annex I 

- 

Annex II 

Annex II 

Annex III 

EN 

104 

   EN 

EN 

105 

   EN