
Danaipour v. McLarey, 183 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D. Mass. 2002)
The children, two girls, were 7 and 3 years old at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. They had lived all of their lives
The children, two girls, were 7 and 3 years old at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. They had lived all of their lives
Grave Risk – Art. 13(1)(b) The trial judge examined the factual scenarios and outcomes in several cases including Walsh, Pollastro, Re F., and Murray, and
Non-Convention Issues The mother complained that the Turkish authorities had failed effectively to enforce her access rights to her children despite numerous attempts she had
L’enfant, une fille de nationalit? turque, comme son p?re, ?tait ?g?e de 4 ans ? la date du d?placement dont le caract?re illicite ?tait all?gu?.
La demande concernait le retour de trois enfants n?s en 1997, 1999 et 2001. La famille avait v?cu ? Montr?al jusqu’en novembre 2000. En raison
The child was almost 2 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. Prior to then she had been living with her Australian mother and
The child was born in 1990 to a French father and a Canadian mother. He had always lived in France. On 13 May 1992, the
Habitual Residence – Art. 3 The issue before the Court was where was the child habitually resident in March 2003. If there was to be
Rights of Custody – Art. 3 Actual Exercise Under English law, the law of the children’s State of habitual residence, the father held rights of
The child, a boy, was 11 years old at the date of the alleged wrongful retention. His parents had not been married, and had separated