Alberto Perez Cedillo Spanish Lawyers and Solicitors Limited
Anthony Gold Solicitors
Smith v. Smith 2001 (3) SA 845
The children, both boys, were 1 _ and 4 months at the date of their retention in South Africa. It was conceded at trial that they were habitually resident in the United Kingdom and that their retention by the mother in March 1999 breached rights of custody held by the father. The father initiated Convention […]
M (Children) (Non-Hague Convention State) [2020] EWCA Civ 277
In re L (A Child) (Habitual Residence) [2013] UKSC 75, [2013] 3 W.L.R. 1597
Robinson v. Robinson, 983 F. Supp. 1339 (D. Colo. 1997)
Return refused; the removal was wrongful, but, the children were now settled in their new environment in accordance with Article 12(2).
Brooke v. Willis, 907 F. Supp. 57 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)
Writ of habeas corpus issued ordering the mother to produce the child in court within fourteen days and show cause why the child was removed.
5A_936/2016, IIe Cour de droit civile, arr?t du 30 janvier 2017
https://www.bger.ch/fr/index/juridiction.htm
5P.254/2005 /frs, Tribunal f?d?ral, II? cour civile
Recours rejet?; retour refus?. Plus d’un an s’?tait ?coul? depuis l’enl?vement et les enfants ?taient int?gr?s ? leur nouveau milieu.
Family Advocate, Cape Town, and another v EM 2009 (5) SA 420 (C)
Retention wrongful and return ordered, subject to conditions; none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.