Tokens: Worse
still
,
the
Latvian
courts
accepted
a
decision
by
the
Australian
court
establishing
joint
parental
responsibility
of
the
applicant
and
T.
with
effect
from
E.
’s
birth
,
in
spite
of
the
fact
that
the
applicant
and
T.
were
not
married
to
each
other
,
the
child
’s
birth
certificate
did
not
name
the
father
and
the
child
was
born
while
the
mother
was
still
married
to
another
man
.
The
Australian
decision
was
taken
after
the
removal
of
the
child
from
Australian
territory
and
with
retroactive
effect
.
It
appears
from
the
case
file
that
the
Australian
decision
was
based
on
photographs
,
e
-
mail
printouts
and
the
sole
testimony
of
T.
No
paternity
tests
were
performed[42
]
.
No
witnesses
heard
.
In
other
words
,
the
Latvian
domestic
courts
did
not
even
consider
if
the
conditions
for
the
application
of
the
Hague
Convention
had
been
met
,
namely
if
they
were
dealing
with
a
child
abduction
in
the
sense
of
the
Hague
Convention[43
]
.
Labels: O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O