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.

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 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 The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980: The New Zealand Courts' Approach to the "Grave Risk" Exception for Victims of Domestic Violence

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allie Maxwell
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Hague Convention

The Hague Convention 1980 was welcomed by the international community to resolve the emerging issue of international child abduction. The Convention is premised on the assumption that all child abduction is inherently harmful. Thus, it is generally in the best interests of children to be returned to the country of habitual residence as expediently as possible, restoring the status quo.Domestic violence victims do not fall within the typical abduction paradigm which the Convention was drafted to remedy. New Zealand courts have adopted a narrow approach to the "grave risk" defence, requiring the abducting party to prove that the country of habitual residence cannot adequately protect the child. This is rarely established due to the influence of the principle of comity. This approach therefore effectively blocks the discretionary inquiry, which only occurs once the defence is established, in which the Convention principles can be weighed against the welfare and best interests of the individual child, a consideration paramount in both domestic and international law. Domestic violence makes it unlikely that return will ever be in the child's welfare and best interests. A change in approach is suggested, under which consideration of the adequacy of the habitual residence's protection laws becomes a relevant consideration in the exercise of discretion. This ensures all considerations are given due regard and the safety of young domestic violence victims is better assured.

scholarly journals COVID-19 CHALLENGES TO THE CHILD ABDUCTION PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Drventić
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
Travel Restrictions ◽  
National Competent Authorities ◽  
International Border ◽  
National Practice ◽  
Insight Into

While creating a new notion of everyday life, the COVID-19 pandemic also affects the resolution of cross-border family disputes, including the international child abduction cases. The return of an abducted child to the country of his or her habitual residence is challenged by travel restrictions, international border closures, quarantine measures, but also by closed courts or cancelled hearings. Those new circumstances that befell the whole world underline two issues considering child abduction proceedings. The first one considers access to justice in terms of a mere possibility of the applicant to initiate the return proceeding and, where the procedure is initiated, in terms of the manner of conducting the procedure. The legislation requires a quick initiation and a summary resolution of child abduction proceedings, which is crucial to ensuring the best interests and well-being of a child. This includes the obligation of the court to hear both the child and the applicant. Secondly, it is to be expected that COVID-19 will be used as a reason for child abduction and increasingly as justification for issuing non-return orders seen as a “grave risk” to the child under Article 13(1)(b) of the Child Abduction Convention. By analysing court practice from the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020 to March 2021, the research will investigate how the pandemic has affected child abduction proceedings in Croatia. Available national practice of other contracting states will also be examined. The aim of the research is to evaluate whether there were obstacles in accessing the national competent authorities and courts during the COVID-19 pandemic, and in which manner the courts conducted the proceedings and interpreted the existence of the pandemic in the context of the grave risk of harm exception. The analyses of Croatian and other national practices will be used to gain an overall insight into the effectiveness of the emerging guidance and suggest their possible broadening in COVID-19 circumstances or any other future crises.

Substantive and Procedural Legal Issues in Dispute Resolution Under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu.A. Marks ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Theoretical Development ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Access Rights

The article is devoted to considering cases on the return of a child or on the exercising access rights in relation to a child on the basis of the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of 1980. The importance of cases concerning the return of a child or the exercise of access rights in respect of a child necessitates theoretical development not only of the procedural institutions, which norms regulate the examination of this category of cases by the courts, but also an analysis of the substantive aspects of disputes concerning the return of a child or the exercise of access rights in respect of a child on the basis of the 1980 Convention. According to the author, the relationship between substantive and procedural law is reflected in the principle of the best interests of the child, the subject of judicial protection, the specifics of the protection means and the subject of proof, as well as the specifics of the composition and procedural position of the persons involved in the trial of the category under study. Particular attention is paid to the tasks and powers of the central authorities established to ensure the unhindered and effective application of the 1980 Convention. It is proposed to transfer the powers of the central body in this sphere from the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation to the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. The development of the institution of mediation, including the active promotion of the expansion of mediation cooperation within the framework of interstate contacts aimed at resolving cases of the category under consideration, seems promising.

scholarly journals TRANSFER OF JURISDICTION AND THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD

2016 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 471-474
Author(s):  
Katarina Trimmings
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Jurisdiction Rule

ARTICLE 8 of the Brussels IIa Regulation sets out the general rule regarding jurisdiction in intra-EU parental responsibility cases, namely that jurisdiction lies with the courts of the Member State of the habitual residence of the child. However, exceptionally, the court that has been seised of a case pursuant to Article 8 may not be the best placed to hear the case. To cater for such situations, the Regulation contains an innovative rule according to which a court that is seised of a case, and has jurisdiction on the substance, can transfer the case to a court of another Member State, if the latter is “better placed” to hear the case, and if the transfer is in the best interests of the child. Additionally, the transfer is subject to the condition that there is a “particular connection” between the child and the other Member State (e.g. the child is a national of that Member State). The “transfer of jurisdiction” rule, which is embodied in Article 15 of the Regulation, is at the heart of the Supreme Court decision in Re N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction) (AIRE Centre and others intervening) [2016] UKSC 15; [2016] 2 W.L.R. 1103.

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.

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.

The Applicability of the 1980 Hague Abduction Convention in Muslim Countries: Particular Reference to the Malaysian Position

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-128
Author(s):  
Abdul Ghafur Hamid ◽  
Nora Abdul Hak ◽  
Najibah Mohd Zin ◽  
Hidayati Mohamed Jani
Keyword(s):  
Islamic Law ◽  
Home Country ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
Muslim Countries ◽  
International Child ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Areas Of Concern

Abstract In response to the increasing number of traumatic international child abduction cases, the Hague Abduction Convention (the Convention) has been adopted to secure the return of abducted children to their home country. Most Muslim countries are, however, not yet parties to the Convention. This article seeks to investigate the reason for this phenomenon, focusing in particular on the Convention’s compatibility with basic tenets of Islamic law. The article also evaluates Malaysian domestic legislation and case law in order to assess whether Malaysia is in a position to be a party to the Convention. The article finds that although there are a few areas of concern, no serious incompatibility between Shari’ah and the Convention exist, and that more dissemination is required to quash misconceptions about the Convention among Muslim countries. The article concludes with recommendations for Muslim countries in this crucial area of protecting the best interests of our children.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document