Source: https://www.incadat.com/en/search?search%5Barticles%5D%5B%5D=Article%2021
Timestamp: 2019-10-15 13:58:49
Document Index: 698460001

Matched Legal Cases: ['Arts 1', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 21', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 21', 'Application no 22909', 'Application No 2171', 'Art. 8', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 21']

Aims of the Convention - Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 (2)
Habitual Residence - Art. 3 (1)
Rights of Custody - Art. 3 (10)
Rights of Access - Art. 21 (28)
Procedural Matters (6)
ECrtHR - Violation of Article 8 ECHR, award of damages (2)
Application dismissed (7)
Superior Appellate Court (6)
1999 | HC/E/UKs 349 | UNITED KINGDOM - SCOTLAND | Appellate Court |
2008 | HC/E/980 | FRANCE | Appellate Court |
CA Lyon, 17 janvier 2008, No de RG 06/05749
Parties urged to resort to mediation in order to solve the dispute involving visitation rights within the context of Article 21 of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention.
2006 | HC/E/USf 827 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | Appellate Court |
2005 | HC/E/USs 828 | UNITED STATES - STATE JURISDICTION | First Instance |
1992 | HC/E/UKe 110 | UNITED KINGDOM - ENGLAND AND WALES | Appellate Court |
2000 | HC/E/AU 282 | AUSTRALIA | First Instance |
Director-General, NSW Department of Community Services and Odierna, 17 March 2000, Family Court of Australia (Sydney) [2000] FamCA 2102
1 5 19 21
Application dismissed; in the absence of a court order conferring him access rights, the father did not have the standing to bring an application for access pursuant to the Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations.
1992 | HC/E/UKe 88 | UNITED KINGDOM - ENGLAND AND WALES | First Instance |
Re C. (Minors) (Enforcing Foreign Access Order) [1993] 1 FCR 770
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Undertakings | Objections of the Child to a Return - Art. 13(2) | Rights of Access - Art. 21
7 13(1)(b) 13(2) 21
Subject to an undertaking, the child was to be sent to the United States for a two week period of contact with the father.
1998 | HC/E/USf 223 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | First Instance |
2010 | HC/E/CA 1095 | CANADA | First Instance |
T.T. c. M.M., Droit de la Famille 103615, Cour supérieure de Roberval, 15 décembre 2010, 2010 QCCS 6585
Application dismissed; imposing the right of access was not in the children's interest.
2005 | HC/E/710 | FRANCE | Appellate Court |
CAA Marseille, 21 février 2005, No de RG 02MA00218
2000 | HC/E/USf 463 | UNITED STATES - FEDERAL JURISDICTION | First Instance |
2014 | HC/E/RU 1342 | European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR) |
Hromadka and Hromadkova v. Russia (Application no 22909/10)
Violation of Article 8, ECHR; the Russian Federation had failed to put in place the necessary legal framework to address the international child abduction case at the time, and had failed to take all reasonable measures to facilitate the enjoyment of the right to family life. The Russian Court's decision to refuse to recognise and enforce the Czech decision of 2 June 2011 did not amount to a violation of Article 8, ECHR.
The Court considered it unnecessary to separately examine the applicant's claim under Article 13, ECHR. 12,500 Euros awarded in damages.
2016 | HC/E/PL 1347 | European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR)
G.N. v. Poland (Application No 2171/14)
13(1)(b) 21
1 child wrongfully retained at 8 months old – National of Canada – Married parents – Father national of Canada and Poland – Mother national of Poland – Child lived in Canada – Application for return filed with the courts of Poland on 31 October 2011 – Return refused before application to ECtHR on 23 December 2013 – Violation of Art. 8 ECHR – EUR 9,000 awarded in damages – The reasoning of the domestic courts in applying Art. 13(1)(b) of the 1980 Child Abduction Hague Convention disregarded the relevant elements necessary for assessing the best interests of the child within the strict application of the Article
1997 | HC/E/AU 211 | AUSTRALIA | Appellate Court |
Police Commissioner of South Australia v. Castell (1997) FLC 92-752, [1997] FamCA 24, 21 Fam LR 643
Appeal dismissed; the Family Law Regulations, which give effect to rights arising under the Hague Convention, do not accord the Australian Central Authority with the power to apply for access rights to be created.
1999 | HC/E/CH 454 | SWITZERLAND | First Instance |
Case No. C 99 4313, 11/10/1999, Arrondissement judiciaire I Courtelary-Moutier-La Neuveville
Grave Risk - Art. 13(1)(b) | Rights of Access - Art. 21
1 4 8 13(1)(b) 21 29 25
Access ordered; the court recognized and enforced the American access order.