Non-Convention Issues
–
Procedural Matters
The case lasted approximately four years and ten months from the moment the father initiated the proceedings for the return of the child until the Supreme Court of Justice ordered the return. In accordance with the suggestion of the Attorney and prior to the final decision, the Court exceptionally ordered a special expert report on the child to examine if compliance with the decision of the Supreme Court could have a physical impact on the child or cause serious psychological disturbances.
The object of ordering this experts’ report was to eliminate the doubts that remained as a result of the lack of direct experts’ reports in the case and, if recommended in the report, to order that the child be accompanied by a provisional guardian. Based on that special expert report, the Court considered that no grave risk had been established to dismiss the prompt return of the child.
Additionally, the Court requested the family judge in charge of the case to set and supervise the conditions for the return so that it would be done in a manner that would minimise possible risks. Although the Inter-American Convention on the International Return of Children was applicable in this case, the Court applied 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention standards since both Conventions share the same objectives and principles.
Authors of the summary: Professor Nieve Rubaja and Sabrina Anabel Silva, Argentina
Menu
