Legal Case
CA Toulouse, 2 d?cembre 2008, No RG 00/03897
Recours rejet?. Le non-retour ?tait illicite mais le p?re y avait acquiesc?.
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
Cass Civ 1?re, 12 d?cembre 2006, No de RG 05-22119
Legal challenge dismissed and decision refusing to return the child to Germany confirmed. The removal had been wrongful but Article 13(1)(b) had been proved to
Legal Case
CA Paris, 27 octobre 2005, No de RG 05/15032
Appeal allowed and return refused; the child was now settled in her new environment pursuant to the terms of Article 12(2).
Legal Case
Cass Civ 1?re (pourvoi n? 05-14646 )
Challenge dismissed; the Cour d’Appel had been correct in finding that none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.
Legal Case
CA Grenoble, 4 juin 2008, No de RG 08/01779
Appeal dismissed. The removal was wrongful and the exceptions of the Convention inapplicable.
Legal Case
CA Aix-en-Provence, 30 novembre 2006, No de RG 06/03661
Recours rejet? et retour refus?. Le retour exposait l’enfant ? un risque grave.
Legal Case
Cass. Civ 1?re, 22 juin 1999, No de RG 98-17902
Challenge to legality dismissed; Article 13(1)(b) had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.
Legal Case
Cass Civ 1?re 16 juillet 1993, N? de pourvoi 92-19618
Challenge to legality dismissed; the mother’s removal was wrongful but she had subsequently been awarded custody.
Legal Case
CA Douai, 24 mai 2007, No de RG 06/03280
Recours rejet? et retour refus?; le d?placement ?tait illicite mais l’exception de l’article 13(1)(b) ?tait applicable.