Deak v. Romania and the United Kingdom, Application No. 19055/05, (2008) 47 E.H.R.R. 50
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Article 8 Right to Family Life The father alleged that his right to family life under Article 8 of the Convention had been breached because the Romanian authorities had failed to take adequate steps to secure the enforcement of his access award. Furthermore the Romanian authorities were wrong to […]
5Ob17/08y, Oberster Gerichtshof, 1/4/2008
L’affaire concernait quatre enfants n?s en 1992, 1996, 1999 et 2001 de parents allemands. Les parents ?taient mari?s. Le 19 mai 2007, la m?re quitta le domicile conjugal et partit s’installer en Autriche avec les enfants. Son avocat informa le p?re moins d’une semaine plus tard qu’elle le quittait et allait provisoirement vivre avec les […]
Lombardi v. Mehnert, 2008 ONCJ 164
The application concerned a child born in New York on 18 May 2007. The parents had been in an on off relationship since October 2004 and had lived together only briefly. They were unmarried. The relationship was characterised by the father’s verbal and physical abuse of the mother and his persistent breach of protection orders. […]
Procedure for Return of Child, Case No. 1313/2007, instituted by A.C. B.I. against P.R.I.P
Aims of the Convention – Preamble, Arts 1 and 2 The purpose of the Convention is to guarantee the immediate return of wrongfully removed and retained children. Grave Risk – Art. 13(1)(b) The court understood that the opposition to the return and the mere allegation of the existence of an imminent physical or psychological danger […]
5A.713/2007 Bundesgericht, II. Zivilabteilung, 28/2/2008
L’affaire concernait un gar?on qui ?tait n? et avait v?cu les premiers mois de sa vie en Afrique du Sud. Ses parents n’?taient pas mari?s et s’?taient s?par?s en avril 2006. A partir de juin 2006, les parents entam?rent des proc?dures en vue de r?gler la question de la garde de l’enfant. Le 14 octobre […]
Kufner v. Kufner, 519 F.3d 33 (1st Cir. 2008)
Removal and Retention – Arts 3 and 12 The mother argued that the removal was not wrongful as she had brought the younger son to the US for medical treatment. The Court held that this was irrelevant for purposes of the wrongful removal determination because the analysis turned on whether the removal was consistent with […]
T.M. c. R.P., Droit de la famille – 08693, Cour sup?rieure de Montr?al, 28 mars 2008, N?500-04-047104-089
The application concerned a daughter born in 2001. Shorty after her birth, the parents, from different countries, settled together in Country A. The family lived there until December 2006. On that date, the mother and the child went to Canada with the consent of the father to visit the grandparents.They were expected to return to […]
B. v. Secretary for Justice [2008] NZFLR 723
Procedural Matters The judge noted that where a litigant sought to revisit a finding on the basis of new evidence this had to be done by way of appeal. In the present case this was not the mother’s object, she wished to challenge the implementation of the order on the ground that an 8 month […]
N? de r?le : 08/1819/A r?f, Tribunal de premi?re instance de Bruxelles 22 f?vrier 2008
Translation in progress – please refer to the French version.
Hoole v. Hoole, 2008 BCSC 1248 (10 January 2008)
Procedural Matters On 8 January 2008 the Oregon Circuit Court sought to initiate direct communication with the Supreme Court of British Colombia. This was in accordance with the Oregon rules which provided that upon being informed of a child custody proceeding having been commenced in another court, the relevant Oregon court shall communicate with the […]