
5P_65/2002/bnm, II. Zivilabteilung, arr?t du TF du 11 avril 2002
L’enfant, un gar?on, ?tait ?g? de pr?s de 4 ans et demi ? la date du d?placement dont le caract?re illicite ?tait all?gu?. Les parents
L’enfant, un gar?on, ?tait ?g? de pr?s de 4 ans et demi ? la date du d?placement dont le caract?re illicite ?tait all?gu?. Les parents
Rights of Custody – Art. 3 The father argued that he held rights of custody and that the removal breached those rights and was therefore
R?sidence habituelle – art. 3 Le p?re pr?tendait entre autres que l’enfant avait sa r?sidence habituelle en France. La Cour observa que l’enfant r?sidait ?
The twin children were born in England to a surrogate mother. At the date of the hearing they were 3 months old and had spent
The child, a girl, was 13 months old at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. She was born in Israel and prior to the
The child, a girl, was 10 years old at the date of alleged wrongful removal. Prior to the removal she had lived in Florida with
The child, a boy, was 12 years of age at the time of the alleged wrongful retention. He had lived in England with his mother
The child, a girl, was nearly 7 years old at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. She had lived in Venezuela all her life.
The child, a girl, was 13 years old at the date of the application. The father claimed that the child’s mother prevented him from exercising
The case related to a boy who was aged 13 at the date of the alleged wrongful retention. The parents were married. The father, a