CA Toulouse, 16 janvier 2007, No de RG 05/06212
CA Paris, 5 octobre 2005, No de RG 2005/16526
CA Paris, 15 f?vrier 2007, No de RG 06/17206
http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichJuriJudi.do?oldAction=rechJuriJudi&idTexte=JURITEXT000019184659&fastReqId=746730886&fastPos=1
CA Toulouse, 2 d?cembre 2008, No RG 00/03897
Recours rejet?. Le non-retour ?tait illicite mais le p?re y avait acquiesc?.
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 the standard required under the Convention.
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.
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).
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.
CA Grenoble, 4 juin 2008, No de RG 08/01779
Appeal dismissed. The removal was wrongful and the exceptions of the Convention inapplicable.
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.