There are many procedural steps to be taken in a Hague Convention case, and just because one state makes a ruling, doesn’t mean it prevents other rulings. When a child has been abducted or wrongfully retained in a member state, if that state makes a decision on an emergency basis, the emergency ruling may not be grounds alone, to refuse to return a child to another member state.

Emergency custody decisions are made to protect a child, and they may be used to temporarily stop a process.

Article 17
The sole fact that a decision relating to custody has been given in or is entitled to recognition in the requested State shall not be a ground for refusing to return a child under this Convention, but the judicial or administrative authorities of the requested State may take account of the reasons for that decision in applying this Convention.

According to the Hague Convention On The Civil Aspects OF International Child Abduction, a case is opened, by giving notice of a Wrongful Removal or Retention of a child, commonly called a Parental Kidnapping or Abduction.

Once notice has been given of a child being wrongfully removed or retained, an investigation is done to determine if the child was TRULY wrongfully removed, before a custody determination can be made in the New Country.

Article 16
After receiving notice of a wrongful removal or retention of a child in the sense of Article 3, the judicial or administrative authorities of the Contracting State to which the child has been removed or in which it has been retained shall not decide on the merits of rights of custody until it has been determined that the child is not to be returned under this Convention or unless an application under this Convention is not lodged within a reasonable time following receipt of the notice.

When an abducting parent wants to delay the proceedings in a Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction case, one of the ways to do it is to make the abandoned parent go back to the court in the “habitual residence” state seeking a ruling that the child was “wrongfully taken”.

These types of cases: wrongful removal, international parental abduction, and parental alienation, are slow, painful and filled with many jurisdictional twists. It takes a skilled and experienced attorney to navigate the paths of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Our experience in this area has helped fathers and mothers be reunited with their children, so they can have fun together and learning in playgrounds as these help with child development as you can see at https://bestplaygroundmarkings.co.uk/the-importance-of-playground-markings-for-child-development/.

Article 15
The judicial or administrative authorities of a Contracting State may, prior to the making of an order for the return of the child, request that the applicant obtain from the authorities of the State of the habitual residence of the child a decision or other determination that the removal or retention was wrongful within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention, where such a decision or determination may be obtained in that State. The Central Authorities of the Contracting States shall so far as practicable assist applicants to obtain such a decision or determination.

When a child has been taken by one parent to another jurisdiction, if a Hague Child Custody case is opened, the court or administrative agency reviewing the case must determine if there was a “Wrongful Removal” of the child.

To decide if the parent who took the child did so in violation of a court order, the reviewing court, uses Article 14 of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and applies the law of the jurisdiction that is the Habitual Residence of the child, that is where has the child BEEN living, and what court orders are there that control their custody.

Article 14
In ascertaining whether there has been a wrongful removal or retention within the meaning of Article 3, the judicial or administrative authorities of the requested State may take notice directly of the law of, and of judicial or administrative decisions, formally recognised or not in the State of the habitual residence of the child, without recourse to the specific procedures for the proof of that law or for the recognition of foreign decisions which would otherwise be applicable.

The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction has safeguards to protect the child and prevent a return to a parent who is not using their custodial time. The Treaty does allows for the refusal to return a child if they would face a “grave risk” such as physical or emotional harm.

Under The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction a child of sufficient age and capacity is allowed to contribute their thoughts and feelings on child custody and being returned. Each court will have its own rules on how this communication is to happen and most are concerned with not causing undo harm an stress to the child and their relationship with their parents.

Article 13
Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding Article, the judicial or administrative authority of the requested State is not bound to order the return of the child if the person, institution or other body which opposes its return establishes that –

a) the person, institution or other body having the care of the person of the child was not actually
exercising the custody rights at the time of removal or retention, or had consented to or subsequently acquiesced in the removal or retention; or

b) there is a grave risk that his or her return would expose the child to physical or psychological
harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation. The judicial or administrative authority may also refuse to order the return of the child if it finds that the child objects to being returned and has attained an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate to take account of its views.
In considering the circumstances referred to in this Article, the judicial and administrative authorities
shall take into account the information relating to the social background of the child provided by the
Central Authority or other competent authority of the child’s habitual residence.

There is a one year guideline during which time a court or administrative authority MUST order the return of the child to their prior residency. After one year, the court hearing a Hague Convention case shall also order the return of the UNLESS it is appear that the child has become “settled” in their new environment.

This means that a parent seeking a return order must act quickly, and the quicker the better.

Article 12

Where a child has been wrongfully removed or retained in terms of Article 3 and, at the date of the commencement of the proceedings before the judicial or administrative authority of the Contracting State where the child is, a period of less than one year has elapsed from the date of the wrongful removal or retention, the authority concerned shall order the return of the child forthwith. The judicial or administrative authority, even where the proceedings have been commenced after the expiration of the period of one year referred to in the preceding paragraph, shall also order the return of the child, unless it is demonstrated that the child is now settled in its new environment.

Where the judicial or administrative authority in the requested State has reason to believe that the child has been taken to another State, it may stay the proceedings or dismiss the application for the return of the child.

Cases that involve Child Custody and Parental Abduction or Kidnapping need to be heard quickly and any parent will tell you that time away from and out of contact with their child is gut-wrenching, which is one of the reasons that the Hague Convention on International Custody has time limits and the child access solicitors have all the information.

Under Article 11, there is a goal of cases being heard within six weeks.

Article 11

The judicial or administrative authorities of Contracting States shall act expeditiously in proceedings for the return of children.

If the judicial or administrative authority concerned has not reached a decision within six weeks from the date of commencement of the proceedings, the applicant or the Central Authority of the requested State, on its own initiative or if asked by the Central Authority of the requesting State, shall have the right to request a statement of the reasons for the delay. If a reply is received by the Central Authority of the requested State, that Authority shall transmit the reply to the Central Authority of the requesting State, or to the applicant, as the case may be.

The lawyers in our offices in Los Angeles County are aware of the need to act quickly in cases involving kidnapped children, because the longer they are away from their alienated parent, and with their abductor, the harder it becomes to fight in court and to undo the emotional and mental trauma that is done by the alienating parent. We try to prevent these kind of cases when child custody agreements are involved. Children should be the last to suffer due to these situations.

Countries who have agreed to the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction are required by the terms of the treaty to assist in the location and recovery of children who are the victims of Parental Abduction, Parental Kidnapping or are being wrongfully withheld by their parent.

Under Article 10 of the treaty which states:

Article 10
The Central Authority of the State where the child is shall take or cause to be taken all appropriate measures in order to obtain the voluntary return of the child.

The problem for the left-behind parent is that the return is supposed to be ‘voluntary’ which makes this a more difficult process. Parents who are kidnapping or abducting their children are not motivated easily to return the child to the other parent. Which is why lawyers have to apply pressure through various means to force the abducting parent to abide by the court orders. We do that by working with the courts such as the Los Angeles Superior Court and the Los Angeles District Attorneys office when necessary.

What Do Signatories To The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction do when an application is filed regarding a Parental Abduction or Parental Kidnapping case? According to the treaty, signatories are required to help locate the child, and if they believe the child may be in another country, they are to assist in informing that country of the possible abduction, kidnapping or wrongful retention of a protected child. In Los Angeles, California that would mean coordinating with the local district attorney, either directly as a parent or through the use of local attorneys such as our firm, Pisarra & Grist who are lawyers that work with the appointed Central Authority for return of the child.

Article 9
If the Central Authority which receives an application referred to in Article 8 has reason to believe that the child is in another Contracting State, it shall directly and without delay transmit the application to the Central Authority of that Contracting State and inform the requesting Central Authority, or the applicant, as the case may be.

As lawyers in Santa Monica, we have represented clients throughout the state of California and coordinated with solicitors, lawyers, barristers and attorneys in foreign countries globally.

The Hague Convention on International Child Abduction sets out standards for what is needed to apply for a return order of a child that is a victim of parental abduction or who has been wrongfully withheld by a non-custodial parent.

A parental child abduction occurs when one parent wrongfully prevents the other parent of a child from seeing the child despite a custody order requiring them to do so and refuses to inform the other parent of the child’s whereabouts, learn more form these child custody lawyers.

Those standards are set out in Article 8:

Article 8
Any person, institution or other body claiming that a child has been removed or retained in breach of custody rights may apply either to the Central Authority of the child’s habitual residence or to the Central Authority of any other Contracting State for assistance in securing the return of the child.

The application shall contain –
a) information concerning the identity of the applicant, of the child and of the person alleged to have removed or retained the child;
b) where available, the date of birth of the child;
c) the grounds on which the applicant’s claim for return of the child is based;
d) all available information relating to the whereabouts of the child and the identity of the person with whom the child is presumed to be. The application may be accompanied or supplemented by –
e) an authenticated copy of any relevant decision or agreement;
f) a certificate or an affidavit emanating from a Central Authority, or other competent authority of the State of the child’s habitual residence, or from a qualified person, concerning the relevant law of that State;
g) any other relevant document.

In theory each signatory country has a duty to aid in the return of a child who has been wrongfully withheld or is the victim of Parental Abduction. In the United States that duty is coordinated through the State Department who designates local authorities such as the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office to aid in the return of abducted children. In reality, many times the victim parent hires private attorneys such as Pisarra & Grist to aid in the process.