scholarly journals Competencia judicial internacional de los tribunales españoles en los casos de sustracción de menores. El trato desigual en situaciones similares = International jurisdiction of the spanish courts in international child abduction cases. The unequal treatment in similar situations

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 825
Author(s):  
Isabel Lorente Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Similar Case ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
International Jurisdiction ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
Unequal Treatment ◽  
International Child

Resumen: A través de esta interesante sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona de 2 de octubre de 2017 se aborda el estudio de la competencia judicial de los tribunales españoles para entrar a conocer de un supuesto de secuestro internacional de menores, en un caso de múltiples aristas internacionales, y con el traslado de una menor de un país no firmante del Convenio de La Haya de 25 de octubre de 1980, Nigeria a España. Se observa el trato desigual que puede llegar a tener un caso similar, si el traslado se hace de un país que no es firmante del Convenio de La Haya de 25 de octubre de 1980 a otro país que sí lo es.Palabras clave: secuestro internacional, competencia judicial internacional, España, Nigeria, residencia habitual, menores.Abstract: Through this interesting judgment of the Provincial Hearing of Barcelona of October 2, 2017 there is approached the study of the international jurisdiction of the Spanish courts to begin to know about a case of minors’ international kidnapping, in a case of multiple international edges, and with the movement about minor one about a not signatory country (Nigeria) of Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, to Spain. Is observed the unequal treatment that can manage to have a similar case, if the movement is done of a country that is not a signatory of the Convention of 25 October 1980 to another country that yes it is.Keywords: child abduction, international jurisdiction, Spain, Nigeria, habitual residence, minor.

scholarly journals Restitución del menor, declaración de ilicitud del traslado y competencia judicial internacional. Comentario al auto de la audiencia provincial de las islas baleares de 19 de abril de 2018 = Return of the child, declaration of wrongful removal and jurisdiction. Comment on the judgment of the Spanish Court of Appealof the Balearic Islands of 19 April 2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 863
Author(s):  
Alberto Muñoz Fernández
Keyword(s):  
Balearic Islands ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
International Jurisdiction ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
Precautionary Measures

Resumen: la solicitud de restitución de un niño ante las autoridades inglesas no impide que los tribunales españoles, país donde el menor tenía su de residencia habitual antes del traslado, declaren la ilicitud del traslado y adopten medidas cautelares para evitar un nuevo traslado internacional.Palabras clave: sustracción internacional de menores, secuestro internacional de menores, restitución del menor, retorno inmediato, declaración de ilicitud del traslado, retirada del pasaporte, competencia judicial internacional, litispendencia, garantías procesales.Abstract: the request for the return of a child before the English authorities does not prevent the Spanish courts, the country where the child had his habitual residence before the transfer, assume jurisdiction to declare the wrongfulness of the removal and adopt precautionary measures to avoid a new international abduction.Keywords: international child abduction, legal kidnapping, return of the child, prompt return, declaration of wrongfulness of the transfer, withdrawal of the Passport, international jurisdiction, lis pendens, procedural guarantees.

scholarly journals Sustracción internacional de menores. Asunto vinculado con Suiza y España. Comentario de la sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial de Pontevedra (Sección 1ª) núm. 52/2018, de 17 de abril = International child abduction. Case related with Switzerland and Spain. Comment on the judgment of the Spanish Court of Appeal of Pontevedra (Section 1) number 52/2018 of 17th April

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 671
Author(s):  
Carmen Azcárraga Monzonís
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Hague ◽  
A Minor ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Resumen: Sustracción internacional a España de menor residente en Suiza en aplicación del Con­venio de La Haya de 1980 sobre los aspectos civiles de la sustracción internacional de menores. Discre­pancia sobre la residencia habitual del menor. No se aprecian motivos de no retorno.Palabras clave: sustracción internacional de menores, Convenio de La Haya sobre sustracción, Convenio de La Haya sobre responsabilidad parental y protección de menores, residencia habitualAbstract: International abduction to Spain of a minor residing in Switzerland under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of 1980. Discrepancy about the habi­tual residence of the minor. No grounds for return denial are appreciated.Keywords: international child abduction, Hague Convention on Child Abduction, Hague Conven­tion on Parental Responsibility and Measures of the Protection of Children, habitual residence

scholarly journals La construcción del concepto autónomo de residencia habitual del menor en los supuestos de sustracción internacional de menores = The construction of the autonomous concept of habitual residence of the child in the cases of international abduction of children

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 877
Author(s):  
Isabel Reig Fabado
Keyword(s):  
Best Interests ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child

Resumen: La concreción de la residencia habitual del menor en los supuestos de sustracción internacional de menores ha resultado especialmente problemática por varias razones. En primer lugar por las interpretaciones divergentes que se han dado en los diferentes ordenamientos jurídicos y, en segundo término, por plantearse de manera especialmente delicada en estos supuestos en los que concurre la sustracción internacional de menores. Y, finalmente y a mayor abundamiento, por la ausencia de un concepto de residencia habitual del menor en la normativa reguladora. Probablemente, la necesidad de concretarlo, en aras al principio del interés superior del menor, en atención a criterios fácticos que, bajo el método casuístico, requiere un análisis de una serie de circunstancias ex casu. Piénsese que, en definitiva, la residencia habitual del menor se configura como criterio clave para la determinación de aspectos tan relevantes como la competencia judicial internacional, no solo en los casos de responsabilidad parental, sino y asimismo, en los supuestos de traslado o retención ilícitos de menores.Palabras clave: sustracción internacional de menores, retención ilícita, competencia judicial internacional, residencia habitual del menor, concepto autónomo, integración y adaptación, retorno inmediato, restitución.Abstract: The realization of the habitual residence of the minor in cases of international child abduction has been especially problematic for several reasons. In the first place because of the divergent interpretations that have been given in the different legal systems and, secondly, because they are considered to be particularly sensitive in these cases in which international child abduction occurs. And, finally and to a greater extent, by the absence of a concept of habitual residence of the minor in the regulatory regulations. Probably, the need to make it concrete, based on the principle of the best interests of the child, in response to factual criteria that, under the casuistic method, requires an analysis of a series of ex-casu circumstances. Think that, definitively, the habitual residence of the minor is configured as a key criterion for the determination of aspects as important as international judicial competence, not only in cases of parental responsibility, but also, in the event of illicit transfer or retention of children.Keywords: international child abduction, illegal retention, international judicial competence, habitual residence of the minor, autonomous concept, integration and adaptation, immediate return, restitution.

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 873-887
Author(s):  
Linda Silberman
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Administrative Authority ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
Critical Aspects

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

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 481-501
Author(s):  
Abdul Ghafur Hamid
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
International Child ◽  
Underlying Principle ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Changing Trend

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

scholarly journals PARENTAL ALIENATION WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION ON THE CIVIL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION: THE BRAZILIAN PERSPECTIVE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-192
Author(s):  
Bruno Rodrigues de Almeida ◽  
Gisela Vieira Dalfeor Vidal
Keyword(s):  
Emotional Abuse ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Parental Alienation ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Right

The number of cases of relocation of children and adolescents to Brazil has increased significantly in the last years. One must consider that abducting or wrongfully retaining children from the places of their habitual residence prevents them from enjoying fundamental rights such as those to historical, social and cultural identities and even the right enjoy full family life with both sides of their families. This article shows that unilateral relocation of children to Brazil (as well their wrongful retention in Brazilian territory)  in violation  of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, is actually one form of Parental Alienation practiced in cross border circumstances, pursuant to Federal Law nº 12.318, from August 26, 2010 (Brazilian Parental Alienation Act). On that sense, Brazilian administrative and judicial authorities must not only engender public policies and strategies to enhance acknowledgement about rules of the Convention among Brazilian communities living abroad, they must also encourage extrajudicial agreements between interested parties to increase the rates of voluntary return of abducted or retained children. In cases brought to courts, since Parental Alienation is a form of emotional abuse of the child, magistrates must count on the opinion of interdisciplinary advisors before considering opinion of the abducted children in the ruling of the return order. In sum, the search for international cooperation with other Contracting States of the 1980 Hague Convention and the respect of the best interest of the child must be in permanent harmony. 

scholarly journals Some Moot Points on the 1980 Hague Abduction Convention

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 683
Author(s):  
Nigel Lowe
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

This article discusses the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction which, despite having been in existence for over 30 years, continues to present a number of uncertainties for Contracting States. The article focuses on the issues around appealing return orders after a child has been taken out of the jurisdiction, the concept of “habitual residence”, and the non-enforcement of return orders with reference to recent case law from the United States, United Kingdom, New Zealand and the European Union. 

scholarly journals PARENTAL ALIENATION WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION ON THE CIVIL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION: THE BRAZILIAN PERSPECTIVE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-192
Author(s):  
Bruno Rodrigues de Almeida ◽  
Gisela Vieira Dalfeor Vidal
Keyword(s):  
Emotional Abuse ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Parental Alienation ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Right

The number of cases of relocation of children and adolescents to Brazil has increased significantly in the last years. One must consider that abducting or wrongfully retaining children from the places of their habitual residence prevents them from enjoying fundamental rights such as those to historical, social and cultural identities and even the right enjoy full family life with both sides of their families. This article shows that unilateral relocation of children to Brazil (as well their wrongful retention in Brazilian territory)  in violation  of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, is actually one form of Parental Alienation practiced in cross border circumstances, pursuant to Federal Law nº 12.318, from August 26, 2010 (Brazilian Parental Alienation Act). On that sense, Brazilian administrative and judicial authorities must not only engender public policies and strategies to enhance acknowledgement about rules of the Convention among Brazilian communities living abroad, they must also encourage extrajudicial agreements between interested parties to increase the rates of voluntary return of abducted or retained children. In cases brought to courts, since Parental Alienation is a form of emotional abuse of the child, magistrates must count on the opinion of interdisciplinary advisors before considering opinion of the abducted children in the ruling of the return order. In sum, the search for international cooperation with other Contracting States of the 1980 Hague Convention and the respect of the best interest of the child must be in permanent harmony. 

scholarly journals PARENTAL ALIENATION WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE 1980 HAGUE CONVENTION ON THE CIVIL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION: THE BRAZILIAN PERSPECTIVE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-192
Author(s):  
Bruno Rodrigues de Almeida ◽  
Gisela Vieira Dalfeor Vidal
Keyword(s):  
Emotional Abuse ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Parental Alienation ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Right

The number of cases of relocation of children and adolescents to Brazil has increased significantly in the last years. One must consider that abducting or wrongfully retaining children from the places of their habitual residence prevents them from enjoying fundamental rights such as those to historical, social and cultural identities and even the right enjoy full family life with both sides of their families. This article shows that unilateral relocation of children to Brazil (as well their wrongful retention in Brazilian territory)  in violation  of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, is actually one form of Parental Alienation practiced in cross border circumstances, pursuant to Federal Law nº 12.318, from August 26, 2010 (Brazilian Parental Alienation Act). On that sense, Brazilian administrative and judicial authorities must not only engender public policies and strategies to enhance acknowledgement about rules of the Convention among Brazilian communities living abroad, they must also encourage extrajudicial agreements between interested parties to increase the rates of voluntary return of abducted or retained children. In cases brought to courts, since Parental Alienation is a form of emotional abuse of the child, magistrates must count on the opinion of interdisciplinary advisors before considering opinion of the abducted children in the ruling of the return order. In sum, the search for international cooperation with other Contracting States of the 1980 Hague Convention and the respect of the best interest of the child must be in permanent harmony. 

II. HABITUAL RESIDENCE AND THE NEWBORN—A FRENCH PERSPECTIVE

2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 530-540
Author(s):  
Aude Fiorini
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Woman ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Affirmative Answer ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
International Child

Where a pregnant woman travels and subsequently gives birth to a child abroad, should the left behind father be able to petition for the ‘return’ of his child under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction? An affirmative answer would not only presuppose that the abduction of the child had been in breach of the father's actually exercised rights of custody, but would also depend on which country, if any, the child was habitually resident in immediately before the ‘abduction’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document