Legal Case
McKiver v. McKiver 1995 SLT 790
Return ordered; the removal of the child had breached the father’s actually exercised rights of custody.
Knowledge Base
Probably the world's biggest database for parental abduction.
Refine Search:
Language
Resource Type
Resource Topics
Countries
Year Published
Keyword Search:
Results:
Legal Case
Singh v. Singh 1998 SC 68
Appeal allowed and return refused. The Lord Ordinary had erred in the exercise of his discretion with respect to the objections of the younger child.
Legal Case
Re M. (Abduction: Psychological Harm) [1997] 2 FLR 690
Appeal dismissed and return refused; the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) to indicate the children would face a grave risk of psychological harm had been
Legal Case
Re S. (Abduction: Acquiescence) [1998] 2 FLR 115
Appeal allowed and return refused; the father had acquiesced in the retention of his son. The court exercised its discretion not to order the return
Legal Case
Re P. (A Minor) (Abduction: Acquiescence) [1998] 2 FLR 835
Appeal dismissed and return ordered, undertakings offered; the standard required under Article 13(1)(a) to indicate consent or acquiescence of the removal had not been met.
Legal Case
Re S. (A Minor), 20 August 1996, High Court, transcript; The Independent, 14 October 1996
Return ordered; the children were habitually resident in Canada at the relevant date.
Legal Case
Whitley v. Whitley 1992 GWD 22-1248
Appeal dismissed and return of the children to the United States ordered; the evidence did not support a finding of a grave risk of harm
Legal Case
Re B. (Abduction: Children’s Objections) [1998] 1 FLR 667
Removal wrongful but return refused on the basis of the children’s objections.
Legal Case
Re H. and Others (Minors) (Abduction: Acquiescence) [1998] AC 72
Appeal allowed and return ordered; Article 13(1)(a) was not established.
Legal Case
??zmen c. Turquie (Requ?te No 28110/08)
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-115009