S. -v- S. [2009] IEHC 345 (17 July 2009)

S. -v- S. [2009] IEHC 345 (17 July 2009)

R.'s habitual residence remained Australia as there was no joint settled intention to reside in Ireland, and the applicant did not consent to retention; thus, retention was wrongful under Article 3 of the Hague Convention, mandating return to Australia.

Citation
[2009] IEHC 345
Parties
Applicant: A. S.; Respondent: C. S.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
17 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction Application Under Hague Convention / Final Judgment
Outcome
Order for return of child to Australia under Hague Convention.
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Habitual Residence, Consent to Retention, Custody Rights
Family Law International Law Child Abduction Habitual Residence Consent to Retention Custody Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. S.

Applicant

C. S.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction Application Under Hague Convention / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child R.'s habitual residence was Australia or Ireland at the time of alleged wrongful retention
  2. 2 Whether the applicant consented to the child being retained in Ireland

Ratio Decidendi

R.'s habitual residence remained Australia as there was no joint settled intention to reside in Ireland, and the applicant did not consent to retention; thus, retention was wrongful under Article 3 of the Hague Convention, mandating return to Australia.

Court Disposition

Order for return of child to Australia under Hague Convention.

Orders

  • Child R. to be returned to Australia forthwith in accordance with Article 12 of the Hague Convention.
  • Arrangements for custody, access, accommodation, and subsistence to be put in place in New South Wales prior to order taking effect.