
Secretary for Justice v. Penney, ex parte Calabro [1995] NZFLR 827
Return refused; the removal was wrongful but the standard required under Article 13(2) had been made out with respect to the two older children, while
Return refused; the removal was wrongful but the standard required under Article 13(2) had been made out with respect to the two older children, while
Return ordered; the removal was wrongful as it was in breach of the father’s rights of custody.
Appeal allowed and return ordered; the removal was wrongful and it was questionable whether the standard required under Article 13(1)(b) had been made out. In
Return ordered; although the children objected to a return there was evidence of external pressure and the court exercised its discretion to make a return
Appeal allowed on the basis that there had been a breach of custody rights and case remitted to the District Court for the making of
Challenge to legality dismissed; the standard of harm required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been met and the return was therefore ordered.
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed36657
Challenge to legality dismissed; the removal of the child was not wrongful as the rights possessed by the BJA did not amount to rights of
Appeal allowed and return ordered; the retention was wrongful and none of the exceptions had been established to the standard required under the Convention.