
1 Ob 147/99w, Oberster Gerichtshof
L’enfant avait la double nationalit? austro-am?ricaine. Les parents ?taient mari?s et avaient d’abord v?cu avec l’enfant ? St Petersburg (USA) avant de s’installer en Autriche
L’enfant avait la double nationalit? austro-am?ricaine. Les parents ?taient mari?s et avaient d’abord v?cu avec l’enfant ? St Petersburg (USA) avant de s’installer en Autriche
The application related to a child born in 1996. He had spent his entire life in the United States with his parents until he was
L’affaire concernait un enfant n? en 1989 et avait pass? les six premi?res ann?es de sa vie au Portugal avant de s’installer en Suisse. Le
Grave Risk – Art. 13(1)(b) A grave risk defence should be based upon serious and convincing evidence. In ordinary circumstances, a parent’s refusal to accompany
The child, a boy, was 6 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. He had spent his entire life in Cyprus. The parents’ marriage
The child, a girl, was 5 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. She had lived in both England and the United States. Her
Two children were born of the marriage of the spouses S and R. The family lived in the United States. The mother unilaterally removed the
The children were 6 and 1 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. They had lived in Israel all of their lives. In late
Settlement of the Child – Art. 12(2) The Full Court noted that since the trial the law had changed with regard to the test to
The child was 2 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. He was taken from South Africa by his English mother. His father, a