The children were 10 1/2 and 9 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. The parents were married and both enjoyed rights of custody.
Grave Risk – Art. 13(1)(b) The Supreme Court held that the exception in Article 13(1)(b) did not apply in the present case for the following
The child, a boy, was aged about 2 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. The parents were married and had joint rights of
The child, a girl, was 1 1/3 at the date of the alleged wrongful retention. She had lived in Italy all of her life. The
The child, a boy, was aged 2 1/2 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. The parents were married. On 28 August 1996 the
The child, a boy, was approximately 7 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. He had lived in Germany and Ireland. The parents were
The child, a boy, was aged 7 at the date of the alleged wrongful retention. He had lived in Italy all his life. The parents
The child, a girl, was 5 1/2 at the date of the alleged wrongful removal. She had lived in the United States all of her
The mother applied for the return of her child before a New York State court. On the day of the hearing the father filed a
The children, two girls, were aged a little over 6 and 3 _ at the date of the alleged wrongful retention. They had spent the