Case C-35/23, Greislzel: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 June 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main – Germany) – Father v Mother (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Parental responsibility – Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 – Articles 10 and 11 – Jurisdiction in cases of the wrongful removal of a child – Child’s habitual residence in a Member State before the wrongful removal – Return procedure between a third country and a Member State – Concept of request for return – The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction)
Date: 2024-06-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, child, child care, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, residence, third country








C_202404697EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/4697


5.8.2024






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 June 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main – Germany) – Father v Mother


(Case C-35/23,
                (1)
Greislzel)
                (2)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Parental responsibility - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Articles 10 and 11 - Jurisdiction in cases of the wrongful removal of a child - Child’s habitual residence in a Member State before the wrongful removal - Return procedure between a third country and a Member State - Concept of ‘request for return’ - The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction)
(C/2024/4697)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Father

Defendant: Mother

Other parties to the proceedings: Child L, Lawyer

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 10(b)(i) of 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,
must be interpreted as meaning that that provision does not cease to be applicable on the sole ground that a request was made to the central authority of a third country for proceedings to be commenced for the return of a child under the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, concluded in The Hague on 25 October 1980, and that those proceedings have failed.










2.


Article 10(b)(i) of Regulation No 2201/2003
must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘request for return’ within the meaning of that provision does not cover either an application for the return of the child to a State other than the Member State in which that child was habitually resident immediately before the wrongful removal or retention, or an application for custody of that child brought before the courts of that Member State.










3.


Article 11(6) to (8) of Regulation No 2201/2003
must be interpreted as not applying when proceedings for the return of a child under the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, concluded in The Hague on 25 October 1980 have commenced between a third country and a Member State on the territory of which that child is present following a wrongful removal or retention.






(1)  
            OJ C 112, 27.3.2023.

(2)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any of the parties to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4697/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)